Dear Editor,
As has been confirmed by both the opposition party and the now defunct former coalition party, Minister Plasterk’s tenure has been a big failure, both when it comes to his domestic dossiers and his dealings with the islands of the former Netherlands Antilles. In my personal opinion, he is by far the worst Minister handling the portfolio dating back as far as I can remember, and the many critical letters he has received from the Government of Sint Eustatius are a testament to that. On top of that, time and again, Minister Plasterk has proven to be unreliable, of bad faith, and not open and honest to the general public and even the Dutch Parliament.
The latter has been very critical of the Minister’s handling of his portfolio and has questioned and reprimanded him on numerous occasions. Minister Plasterk has also been criticized by the Raad van State (Council of State) for breaking the law, as he ignored legal advice from different sources. It is therefore no surprise that even within the Dutch council of ministers Plasterk was not really taken seriously. The main cause for this was because he was not really in charge of his ministry and left decision making up to his top civil servants. This was mentioned in a newspaper article in the Antilliaans Dagblad on August 10, 2017.
Just to name a few of Plasterk’s failures:
•The unlawful interference in the internal affairs of Sint Maarten and Aruba by giving the (former) Governors of the islands instructions.
•Wasting money on the IdeeVersa and Spies reports without implementing the recommendations
•Committing payments to KPMG without the approval of the Island Council
•Hiding the report about the malfunctioning of former kingdom representative Wilbert Stolte and BZK in particular, and not following through with its recommendations.
Plasterk will be meeting with the Executive and Island Councils of Sint Eustatius on August 14, as part of his farewell tour of the islands. Unfortunately, he has not much to be proud of.
In contrast, the current coalition Government of Sint Eustatius, which met the government administration in complete disarray, and the fact that the island was stuck at the same level of development of 30 years ago, has been able to start a number of initiatives which Minister Plasterk has been trying to boycott, while creating the impression that he wanted to help the island move forward.
These include: finalizing the agreement with NuStar; permanently filling key management and other positions which are crucial to improving the functioning of government; starting with the preparations of fixing the roads by local contractors; improving the ICT infrastructure and functioning; setting up an economic development council; engaging in talks with foreign investors and other partners in the field of aviation, logistics; preparing a draft Constitution for Sint Eustatius, and carrying out a feasibility study for Sint Eustatius
All these initiatives, and more which are being prepared, are the accomplishments of the democratically-elected government of Sint Eustatius, headed by my coalition partner Reuben Merkman and I.
As is widely known, Plasterk and his party suffered a debilitating and humiliating defeat at the latest polls in the Netherlands. The current caretaker Dutch coalition government already lacks majority support in the Dutch Parliament, and might even fall before the new government is installed.
Based on Plasterk’s dismal performance since he took office, and the reaction to it by the Dutch voters during the last elections, I suggest that in his talks with the Government of Sint Eustatius, Plasterk humbles himself again, and shows the respect due to the democratically-elected and appointed local representatives of Sint Eustatius.
I am aware of Plasterk's recent letter and remarks. It is clear by the actions of BZK that he is purposely ignoring the legal standpoint taken by Sint Eustatius and is having an open dialogue about it. It is also clear that he is unlawfully trying to take over the local government under the guise of higher supervision by putting in place failed and recycled Dutch civil servants, a phenomenon which has been pointed out by the Antilliaans Dagblad a few months ago.
I am hereby cautioning Plasterk that any attempt at interfering with – or removing this democratically-elected government via the acting governor or others – will be met with fierce resistance. The consequences will be for Plasterk’s account, and if he and the Dutch government have learned anything from history, they would be well-advised to do the right thing while he still has the chance.
Clyde I. van Putten
Leader of Government of St. Eustatius
