The motion of no-confidence against Prime Minister Leona Romeo-Marlin submitted by NA parliamentarian William Marlin (see Tuesday paper) was the second such motion in about two weeks targeting members of the UD/SMCP government. It followed the one by his faction colleague Christophe Emmanuel against Minister of Tourism, Economic Affairs, Transport and Telecommunication (TEATT) Stuart Johnson.
The latter motion was based on the minister’s non-appearance in the legislature particularly regarding developments at Princess Juliana International Airport (PJIA) of which he is the shareholder’s representative. It has not been adopted so far, but during Monday’s meeting in which Marlin presented his against the prime minister, the opposition factions of NA and US Party had a majority because three of the seven UD members were absent.
The meeting was adjourned until Thursday at 3:00pm, when the public will learn the result. If the elected representatives who were not present on Monday show up, they can yet sign in to restore the coalition’s majority. Should they fail to do so it could be a sign of no longer backing Romeo-Marlin and in effect allowing her to be sent home.
What might happen afterwards is unclear, because those who signed the motion would still not have a permanent majority to form a new government and appoint someone else. The only way that can happen is if one or more of the coalition members openly side with the group.
PJIA is again the bone of contention, with the opposition stating the prime minister failed to act timely on the airport’s request for a letter of guarantee. That supposedly led to accepting the Trust Fund grant/EIB loan with abnormal conditions under pressure.
The motion also mentions that Romeo-Marlin’s “approach to Kingdom Relations does not echo the sentiments and positions taken by her own coalition,” a possible reference to lack of political support. However, none of the coalition members present on Monday gave such indication during the debate.
A word of caution is in order. Any change in government and reversing the airport deal could not only jeopardise the latter’s crucial prompt restoration but conceivably put at risk the entire remaining part of the 470 million euros in assistance from the Dutch-sponsored Trust Fund, especially if the incoming cabinet takes an antagonistic approach towards The Hague. The management contract for the fund with the World Bank states that the Netherlands can unilaterally abandon the venture except for existing contractual obligations.
While the related projects have been long and slow in coming, a complete stop is the last thing the country and its still recovering tourism economy need.
