The recent increase of Curaçao’s AOV pension from NAf 860 to NAf 1,000 per month has received considerable attention. For thousands of senior citizens, it has provided some welcome relief. However, the measure does not address the structural problem hidden behind the real debate.
Although the increase was based on a political decision rather than automatic indexation, it is being swallowed almost immediately by the rising cost of living. Whatever extra income pensioners receive is quickly spent at the supermarket, on electricity bills, or on medication.
The figures show that Curaçao is facing a much larger challenge.
According to the 2023 Census, nearly one in every four residents of Curaçao is 65 years of age or older. In 2011, that percentage was significantly lower. Curaçao is aging rapidly.
At the same time, the number of people participating in the workforce is not growing at the same pace. This means that every year there are relatively fewer contributors supporting a growing number of pensioners.
That is why the AOV debate is not really a pension issue.
It is a demographic and economic issue.
Most public discussions focus on how much the AOV payment should be. This is understandable, as many senior citizens struggle to make ends meet with their current income. But even if the government decided tomorrow to increase the AOV by another few hundred guilders, the fundamental question would remain:
Who will pay for it ten or twenty years from now?
That is the dilemma facing the current government.
There is tremendous political pressure to produce quick results. However, not every problem can be solved within a single term of office. You cannot reform an aging society in four years. This process will take decades, and therefore the solution must also be designed with a much longer horizon in mind.
That does not mean seniors should simply wait.
On the contrary.
The purchasing power of pensioners must be protected in the short term.
At the same time, however, we must also look at the other side of the equation.
What has a greater impact?
An increase in the AOV of NAf 100?
Or lower costs for food, energy, healthcare, and housing?
For many pensioners, the latter could provide greater benefits than a limited increase in their pension.
Furthermore, Curaçao must invest in economic activities that generate new income.
More jobs, higher productivity, greater entrepreneurship, increased exports, and more investment are no longer luxuries. They have become necessities.
After all, no AOV fund can ever be stronger than the economy that finances it.
There is another point that, honestly, must also be discussed.
Some argue that the AOV should eventually reach a level sufficient to lift every recipient out of poverty. Historically, however, the AOV was never designed to serve as a complete source of household income. It was intended as a minimum foundation, supplemented by occupational pensions, personal savings, home ownership, or other sources of income.
This does not mean that our senior citizens do not deserve a dignified life.
They certainly do.
However, that objective cannot be achieved through AOV increases alone. It can only be achieved if the economy creates enough value to sustainably finance those commitments.
That is why the real question is not:
“How can we increase the AOV today?”
The real question is:
“How can Curaçao ensure that twenty years from now there will still be enough people working and contributing to finance the costs of the AOV system?”
Once that question is answered, the AOV debate will cease to be a crisis-management exercise and become a serious discussion about the future of our island.
Conclusion
The increase to NAf 1,000 was politically necessary. But it is not the solution. It is merely temporary relief.
The real solution lies not only in the AOV fund itself, but in economic growth, higher productivity, talent retention, and keeping the cost of living under control. Until those foundations are strengthened, any future increase in the AOV will provide only temporary relief.
Orlando Meulens
Columnist