The St. Maarten Hospitality and Trade Association (SHTA) should be commended for not just talking about electoral reforms, but coming up with concrete proposals to realise such (see related story).
Whether the ideas are practical and actually achievable is an entirely different matter.
One is for the highest 15 vote-getters to be elected into Parliament, regardless of how the rest of their parties do. Voters also would be able to choose someone for each of the 15 seats.
Apart from being a totally new and unfamiliar way of going to the polls, this option probably would weaken even more the local political parties lacking structure as it is. After all, the candidates would not depend on how their parties do and therefore would have to adhere to their policies less than they now do already.
In addition, at least eight parliamentarians still would have to agree on supporting and appointing a Council of Ministers without their organisations as a whole necessarily being involved. Forming governments under those circumstances is not likely to become any easier.
The second alternative is dividing the seats among the voting districts and having candidates run in only one. However, the number of districts was increased from 16 to 20 last year due to rules about the maximum eligible voters residing in each district, so some major changes would need to be made there.
With more districts than seats, assigning them based on number of votes per district is obviously not feasible, unless various districts are merged or the number of seats is increased. The latter can hardly be called an attractive prospect, considering the salaries elected representatives receive and the country’s financial situation.
SHTA itself, in opposing the William Marlin Cabinet’s move to cancel snap elections scheduled for February 9, says expecting the beneficiaries of a broken system to fix it is unrealistic. That’s exactly why electing the current Parliament, but also a next one, under the same conditions to approve reforms – and in the case of adjusting the constitution even with a two-thirds majority – seems a rather tall order.
