PHILIPSBURG--National Alliance (NA) Member of Parliament (MP) Ardwell Irion criticized Parliament’s decision to reduce MPs’ speaking time during the 2026 budget debate, saying the change could limit Parliament’s ability to hold government accountable. He also described the manner in which the Chair of Parliament and the presidium operates as “a dictatorship.”
Irion made the remarks on Friday, the second day of the debate on the draft 2026 budget, following a decision taken on Thursday to reduce the time available to MPs to speak during the debate.
The change followed a proposal by Soualiga Action Movement (SAM) MP Franklin Meyers, who argued that more than 2,500 questions had already been submitted to the executive branch on the budget and answered. Meyers proposed reducing speaking time from 90 minutes to 60 minutes in the first round and from 45 minutes to 30 minutes in the second round.
He said the Central Committee had been required to deal with 2,500 questions and that civil servants had worked “night and day” on them. He also referred to approximately 1,300 pages of answers submitted to Parliament by the executive branch. “If you can’t get our message across in an hour, then your message is superfluous,” Meyers said. The proposal was voted on and approved by eight members voting in favour and four against.
Before the vote, National Alliance (NA) MP Egbert Doran objected to reducing the time, saying Parliament had already lost opportunities for discussion for the Central Committee meeting.
On Friday, Irion said he was disappointed with Thursday’s discussion over the reduction of speaking time, which he said had become a topic both in Parliament and in the wider community. He described the situation as “sort of a dictatorship” and said, “In here we have a dictatorship when it comes to the chair and the presidium.” He also referred to the opposition’s earlier disagreement with the Central Committee’s proposed changes, saying the opposition had warned that the approach could create problems for civil servants. Irion argued that the changes had contributed to duplication in the questions submitted by MPs and ultimately to the large number of questions raised during the budget process.
He questioned why SAM had sought the reduction, saying the party had not asked questions during the budget process. Irion said he was surprised that the MP who had not raised questions during the Central Committee process would now seek less time to question government during the budget debate.
Irion said civil servants themselves had provided Parliament with questions because they had concerns.
Irion said the 2,500 questions referred to during Thursday’s discussion were not all new questions. He explained that some questions that had been asked months earlier and remained unanswered were included in the budget questions because MPs had requested answers before the budget debate.
He said the opposition had previously warned that changing the Central Committee process would create problems for civil servants. Under the previous approach, Irion said, MPs could avoid duplication because when one MP asked a question, another MP would not necessarily ask the same question.
He argued that requiring MPs to submit their questions separately had contributed to duplication and ultimately to the large number of questions.
