Print this page

MP Buncamper presents Questions on a Number of Issues

MP Claudius Buncamper MP Claudius Buncamper

SINT MAARTEN (PHILIPSBURG) - During the public meeting of parliament on Thursday, Member of Parliament (MP) Claudius Buncamper stated in his notification remarks that he believes that a harsh tone has already been set for this meeting regarding the disrespectful letter of the Minister of VROMI to the Ombudsman, a high council of this country, the MP said in his notes on Thursday in the House of Parliament.

The MP continues in his presentation in the General Assembly Chamber: “The remarks directed to the ombudsman about her personal life have absolutely no bearing to the questions that were posed. Those type of remarks were totally out of context when addressing any high council in this country.

“They were basically sexist. I once told a person on this floor not to “whine like a woman” and I took the high road and apologized the same afternoon publicly as I meant no disrespect to the woman of the country. I hope that you use the opportunity given here today to you to also take that high road and apologize to the Ombudsman.  

“During his turn to question the Minister of VROMI, Egbert Doran, the MP posed the following questions regarding the Vineyard Heights land issues.

  1. What should we conclude of the letter of the Ombudsman regarding the state of affairs regarding the lands at Vineyard Heights?
  2. Why are lots now given out seeing there is no infrastructure in place?
  3. Does government have the necessary funds for the infrastructure? If not those persons who have received a parcel of land are unable to utilize it, and are therefore not obliged to pay the cannon.
  4. How does the government plan to finance the Vine yard heights project of apartments, that will be for sale and rent? Who will manage this project from start to finish?
  5. What’s the role of SOG in the Vineyard Heights project, taking the accumulated debts incurred in the Festival Village into account and the condition of the other buildings they presently manage?
  6. Am I to understand from the minister’s remarks made on various radio talk shows, that former Minister of VROMI, Mr. Angel Meyers committed illegal/wrongful acts when he gave out the 54 parcels of land? If yes, what illegal acts did the former minister commit?
  7. When did the court grant government full ownership of the land in questions?
  8. Would any minister at that point in time have been able to grant said land to the 54 recipients while following proper procedures?
  9. Why is it that no other minister after former Minister Meyers attempted to grant the parcels of land in question to anyone else? Is it because there was no infrastructure in place at the time? And granted them the land would be a deceitful act, as those persons would not be unable utilize the land?
  10. What procedures were used to determine who were eligible to receive a parcel of land in Vineyard heights? Can parliament be provided a copy of the criteria?
  11. Have any legal actions started against government by any of the 54 persons who were duped by this government, as it appears that continuity in government does not exists? What is your position on continuity in government, Minister, and how is it applied in this particular case?
  12. The Ombudsman stated that the standard of legal certainty (opgewekte vertrouwen) is essential in any state of law; it requires legitimate expectations to be honored by the government. Minister, do you agree with and thus support this statement?
  13. Minister, do you believe that the 54 recipients of the property at Vineyard Heights could have been under a reasonable belief that after the court case they would be get back their parcel of land as was agreed upon by the previous government? Would you, Minister, as a resident unaware of the details of how the process works, have the same belief?
  14. Minister, when I saw the documents that were on the Facebook page of the journalist Mr. Ralph Cantave regarding the bidding process and the internal granting advice, and the headline that read “Questionable Bidding Process”, it was clear that something did not go right with the bid. So allow me pose the following questions so that you can clarify for all of us;
  1. Why was the decision taken to have an invitation bid instead of a public bid? Was this an emergency?
  2. Why was the tender not granted to the Access NV that complied with the tender request to submit a price?
  3. Why was the company Atys Architecture allowed to come back a few months later to submit a price which is totally not in accordance with the bidding procedure?
  4. Atys Architecture explained to a journalist that the works should under normal circumstances cost about 15-20K dollars. Why did the ministry accept an underbid cost of NAF 3.000,=?
  5. Minister, when I look at the advice, there is only one signature signing on behalf of the department. Is this a normal procedure in the ministry? If so, please explain how the checks and balances is done?
  6. Minister, the article of the journalist Ralph Cantave states that the Atys group spokesman said that he did it for this special price because the head of VROMI told him he would be part of the project in the future? How fair is this towards the others involved? Please explain the meaning of “he will be part of the project in the future?"
  7. Why would the tender be stopped, and a new tender made as per the process regulation if government did not accept Access NV’s offer?
  1. The Ombudsman zorgbrief stated that a tender for the infrastructure will be going out. A) Who will be handling the tender for the infrastructure? B) How much is the internal cost for the infrastructure? C) Does government have the funds for this infrastructure? Or will the SOG or Government take a loan to cover the costs? D) Who will guarantee the loan and what effects will this have on our already high borrowing ratio? E) Is the 20 million dollars reserved by the Steering Committee to be used for the Vineyard Heights projects instead of the Belvedere homes?
  2. Why is there a notice in the media informing those persons who had a signed deed and/or papers for the Over the Bank project to bring them in before November 2021? Why wasn’t this done before granting the lots to tohere persons?
  3. When will the finalization of the lands for Denicio Wyatt be finalized?
  4. The Rain Forest project was granted over350 thousand square meters of land. I have the following questions;
  1. What is the status of the property at Rain Forest that was to be returned to the government?
  2. Has Rain Forest paid up its outstanding cannon?
  3. Will that land be put to “eventually good” use like various forms of agriculture? 19. Will the lands that were used by Shipyard now be cleared up and turned over once for all?”
Copyright © 2015 Soualiga Newsday - All rights reserved.