PHILIPSBURG--President of Parliament Sarah Wescot-Williams says the unprecedented use of artificial intelligence during Parliament's review of the 2026 national budget should serve as a learning opportunity to strengthen parliamentary oversight, with the focus on asking better questions rather than simply more questions.
Reflecting on the submission of thousands of budget questions by Members of Parliament, Wescot-Williams said the experience demonstrated both the potential and the practical challenges of integrating artificial intelligence into parliamentary work.
"The volume of questions has generated considerable public discussion," Wescot-Williams said. "Some have applauded the thoroughness of Parliament's oversight, while others have questioned whether such a volume is practical or even effective. I believe both perspectives deserve consideration."
She said many members have used artificial intelligence for the first time to assist with reviewing the national budget. "Artificial intelligence has democratised access to knowledge," she stated. "It enables every Member – regardless of the size of their staff or available resources – to analyse complex budget documents, identify inconsistencies and generate questions in a fraction of the time previously required. That is a significant advancement for parliamentary democracy."
However, she cautioned that the technology also requires a new approach. "When every member independently asks AI to analyse hundreds of pages of budget information, the result is predictable. Hundreds of questions quickly become thousands. Many are valuable. Many overlap. Some ask essentially the same thing in different ways."
According to Wescot-Williams, this places a significant burden on government's administrative machinery and may ultimately undermine Parliament's objective.
"Our goal should never be to ask the greatest number of questions. Our goal must always be to obtain the best possible information on behalf of the people we represent. If the government is overwhelmed by volume, there is a real risk that responses become standardised, superficial or repetitive. In that case, Parliament is not necessarily better informed."
She said the experience provides an opportunity for Parliament to continue strengthening its institutional capacity.
"For some time now, I have advocated for a Parliament that continues to mature as an independent institution. Our constitutional responsibilities extend beyond reacting to Government. We legislate, we represent and we exercise oversight. But we must also continuously strengthen our own institutional capacity to perform those responsibilities effectively."
The President proposed that Parliament first undertake a shared institutional review of the budget before Members submit questions.
"Imagine Parliament first undertaking a shared institutional review of the budget. Members could collectively identify the major financial risks, policy inconsistencies, implementation concerns and accountability gaps. That process would not replace political debate. It would enrich it."
She stressed that each political faction would remain free to pursue its own priorities and submit additional questions. "Parliamentary independence would remain untouched. What would change is the quality of our preparation. Instead of producing thousands of disconnected questions, we could produce a sharper, more strategic line of enquiry. Success should be measured by the quality of the answers we receive and the decisions that follow."
Wescot-Williams also noted that legislatures around the world are facing similar challenges as artificial intelligence reshapes public institutions.
"AI has changed the equation. The ability to generate information is no longer a scarce resource. AI can produce information in seconds. The scarce resource is judgment: Knowing which questions matter most, recognising patterns, connecting risks across ministries, evaluating policy choices and exercising sound parliamentary judgment. That remains the responsibility of elected representatives."
She said the initiative aligns with her vision of an Open Parliament. "Too often, openness is understood simply as publishing documents or livestreaming meetings. Those are important, but they are only the beginning. A truly Open Parliament is one that promotes understanding, encourages participation, strengthens collaboration and continuously improves the way it serves the people."
She said she envisions a Parliament where members are better prepared before debates begin, committee work is more analytical, information is more accessible to citizens and technology allows legislators to spend less time processing information and more time exercising sound judgment.
Wescot-Williams expressed confidence that St. Maarten can demonstrate leadership in parliamentary innovation. "Small jurisdictions are often told to follow others. I believe St. Maarten can also innovate. We can demonstrate that a small Parliament, equipped with modern tools and guided by a clear vision, can become more independent, more transparent, more collaborative and ultimately more effective in serving the people of St. Maarten."
