The Economic Debate of the Association of Economists in Suriname (VES) and the various party debates in the run-up to the elections did not sufficiently highlight the core themes of good governance. Substantive depth and concrete policy proposals remained underexposed, while society needs a sharp contrast between the party programs.
Critics argue that the VES meeting revolved mostly around statistics and financial jargon, with no room for mutual consideration of which recovery measures should be prioritized. "We saw many presentations, but too few real practical examples on transparency, anti-corruption measures and institutional reforms."
Television debates between political parties also appeared rather ritualistic. Although candidates repeated their positions, concrete timetables for bills and system checks to anchor promises made were lacking. "Voters deserve more than opinion polls and rhetorical flair; they want to know what the framework for legislation looks like and what mechanisms will be in place to enforce implementation."
Suriname desperately needs a real debate in which parties not only announce their goals, but also debate their legal, administrative and financial feasibility. Such a forum should be structured around topics such as
Anti-corruption and integrity,
Public finance and fiscal discipline,
Efficiency and digitization of government services,
Public administration and citizen participation.
It is proposed that a "National Debate" still be instituted, where political leaders sit down and debate with each other on substance. Only in this way can Suriname close the gap between promises and real reforms, which are necessary for sustainable development and confidence in the state system.
