Dear Editor,
It annoyed me, the recent lobby letter written by the employers’ organisation VNO-NCW about financial aid to Curaçao, Aruba and St. Maarten. A group of famous Dutch people demanded that our country should not set conditions to this support. I understand that Hans de Boer, foreman of the large companies, took this initiative.
Many Dutch entrepreneurs, consultants and tax specialists earn a lot of money on the islands. The poor people on the island don’t benefit from that. However, I was amazed at the support for this lobby by Alexander Pechtold (D66) and Paul Rosenmöller (GroenLinks). Politicians who know the islands very well. Rosenmöller has even investigated corruption in Curaçao in the past.
The islands are rich, but the differences between the people are painful. If the Netherlands does not set conditions, that money will not reach the poor who desperately need the support. It doesn’t reach the people who have lost their jobs and the families where children haven’t got enough to eat.
George Jamaloodin became the first minister of finance of the new country of Curaçao in October 2010. Now this politician is in prison and has been sentenced to 28 years in prison for his involvement in the murder of MP Helmin Wiels, his coalition partner back then.
At the beginning of 2010 Jamaloodin had bribed the head of security of the secret service of Curaçao VDC. One month before Curaçao would become an autonomous country on October 10, 2010, Jamaloodin travelled to St. Maarten, together with this head of security at the VDC. They had a private meeting with Gerrit Schotte, the future prime minister of Curaçao; with Theo Heyliger, who was the most powerful politician in St. Maarten, and with Francesco Corallo, the Italian gambling boss. Schotte and Heyliger, meanwhile, have been sentenced to long prison terms for fraud and corruption. Corallo is on trial in Italy for large-scale fraud and bribing politicians.
Criminal plans
I know about this remarkable meeting through reports I have received that show how, before October 10, 2010, criminals made plans to take over power in the autonomous countries of Curaçao and St. Maarten by a devilish trinity of the gambling industry, with ties to the Italian mafia, consultants, often from the Netherlands, and some local politicians that could be bribed.
The VDC was ransacked a year after Schotte came to power on Curaçao. All information was destroyed, copied or stolen. In addition, information from the Dutch secret service AIVD and the American secret service CIA would also have come into the hands of criminals. Schotte also tried to make Corallo or his financial right-hand man the president of the Central Bank of Curaçao and St. Maarten. This was prevented at the last minute, partly due to the actions of a number of Dutch Members of Parliament.
Bad relations
Relations between the Netherlands and the other countries of the Kingdom are bad, we must conclude 10 years after the autonomy of Curaçao and St. Maarten. The support that our country wants to give in fighting the consequences of the corona crisis has led to accusations against the Netherlands, mainly because of the conditions set on helping. Yet these conditions are not that strange, they must above all ensure that the money ends up with the people most affected by the crisis.
The Netherlands also requests that local politicians make a contribution by discounting their often very generous allowances. It is also requested that the many millionaires on the islands make their contribution and pay decent tax. That has not happened in the past 10 years. If the supporters of VNO-NCW were to behave more decently, the countries of Curaçao and St. Maarten would be financially healthier and could invest more.
In 2005, Minister Alexander Pechtold came to the Senate to speak to the senators about the future of the Kingdom. That year a referendum was held in Curaçao, in which the population had chosen not to become independent, but an autonomous country within the Kingdom. The same was the choice of the people in St. Maarten.
At the time I was a member of the Senate. Pechtold received questions about the negotiations and proudly said that the Netherlands had pledged more than two billion euros in debt restructuring. There was a deep silence in the small room in the Senate. An old senator took the floor and asked what the minister had in return. The answer came as a shock: nothing at all. No demands for good governance and good finances. After Schotte and his ministers took office, it turned out that no screening had even taken place.
No confidence
In 2010 I voted against the new relations. I wholeheartedly wanted the people on the islands to have their autonomy, but I had no confidence in the future of Curaçao and St. Maarten, because the islands were just not ready for this. Also, because the relationship with the Netherlands remained unclear. These countries were autonomous and responsible for their own politics, but the Netherlands remained responsible for good governance and healthy finances.
It was not clear how we could fulfil that responsibility – and our country did not succeed. Money disappeared soon after Heyliger and Schotte came to power. The judge said in Schotte’s conviction that the prime minister had behaved like a “puppet” of the gambling industry. From bosses like Corallo, whose accounting was done for years and was approved by KPMG’s accountants.
On my initiative (in a proposal adopted in April 2015), a large-scale investigation started into the connection between the criminal and the political world on all the islands, in particular between the gambling industry and politics. This has partly led to Schotte and Heyliger being under lock and key and many other politicians, consultants and gambling bosses have also been convicted or have been subject of investigation (lately also in Aruba). This is important because the islands have no future as long as they are under the control of the criminal world. But it is especially bad that the Netherlands has let it come to this. That we made these autonomous countries 10 years ago and let them fall into the hands of criminals. That is a heavy responsibility for all politicians in the Netherlands, also for Pechtold and Rosenmöller.
Intimidation
In July 2015 I received a letter from Gerard Spong, a famous Dutch lawyer. He filed a lawsuit because I called his client Francesco Corallo a mafia boss. However, it never came to an actual case, because Corallo is a mafia boss. Corallo is now on trial in Italy for large-scale fraud and money-laundering and bribing politicians from the Berlusconi government.
I was not surprised that Corallo sent me that letter. Unfortunately, this kind of intimidation is common on the islands. However, I found it remarkable that the lawyer Spong lent himself for this intimidation of a Dutch MP. Many politicians on the islands will not stand up to this kind of scare. I know that there are many politicians in Aruba, Curaçao and St. Maarten who want the best for their beautiful island, but who no longer dare to speak freely in the last 10 years.
I wholeheartedly support the help that the Netherlands will offer to the other countries in the Kingdom, which we are obliged to our fellow citizens. But at the same time, we must put an end to the diabolical trinity of Antillean politics. As an MP, I have tried to make my contribution by tackling the gambling mafia, such as the research into politics and the gambling industry, and by addressing the consultants who make money laundering possible.
I am proud that KPMG was closed in the Caribbean last year. But it hurts me that we now have to solve problems that the Netherlands has also caused itself. The dirty gambling bosses, or the dubious consultants, are often people from outside and not from the islands themselves. A small wealthy group on the islands enriches itself thanks to bad governance. The poor population in particular pays the price for this.
Failed Kingdom
In every government capital in the Kingdom they are thinking about the future. In The Hague, in Willemstad, in Oranjestad and in Philipsburg, everywhere the conclusion must be that we cannot go on like this. This Kingdom has failed and it is now up to the inhabitants to decide how to proceed. Let the inhabitants of the islands make a choice. What do they want their own politicians to do, and with what matters the Netherlands should no longer interfere? What tasks do they prefer the Netherlands to perform, whereby The Hague should also be given the opportunity to really do this?
In July last year, the Second Chamber passed my proposal asking all four countries to give their views on the Kingdom and who is responsible for what. With the support of the parties of Pechtold and Rosenmöller. I continue to advocate for help to those on the islands who deserve our help and support. At the same time, we will have to learn from the past mistakes.
Ronald van Raak
Member of the Dutch Parliament’s Second Chamber for the Socialist Party (SP)
Dear Editor,
I am grateful and appreciative for the assistance given by the Dutch government with the food program to the islands in general and St. Maarten in particular. Of the initial 16 million euros, approximately 3 million euros, which is approximately Ang. 5 million, was sent to St. Maarten for the food distribution program. The decision of The Kingdom Council of Ministers to extend this program with an additional 25 million euros in continuation of this venture is welcome.
What I am not clear on, is who are the local partners State Secretary Knops is referring to, when he said, and I quote, “The distribution of food parcels takes place under the coordination of the Netherlands Red Cross and in cooperation with local partners, including non-governmental organizations (NGOs). This working method will be continued,” end of quote.
A concern of mine has to do with regular complaints from persons who claim that their neighbor would get food packages on numerous occasions while they are neglected. In my opinion the department that has more data on the most vulnerable, the government’s Social Affairs Department, is being side-lined. It is unfortunate that these organizations, as useful as they are, can collect personal data without the permission or intervention of the Department of Social Affairs. I am quite aware of their independence, but the final responsibility for the people lies with the government of St Maarten.
When persons don’t receive their food packages they blame government, not the Red Cross, the NGOs or the local partners, whoever they are.
Again, let me reiterate that their assistance is highly appreciated. I say this because there is a saying “een gegeven paard moet je niet in de mond kijken”, or freely translated, “you don’t look a gift horse in the mouth”.
What I would like to know is who provides the Dutch government with the data on how many households receive these food packages. Minister Knops claims to know that tens of thousands of persons lost their jobs on the islands or have lost much of their income, but still insists on government cutting the salaries of these most vulnerable, which to me is compounding their misery. What an oxymoron.
I know this might sound like an impossible request which will fall on deaf ears, but it would bode well in the name of transparency if State Secretary Knops could give St. Maarten government and the islands of Aruba and Curaçao a breakdown with documentation as to how much funds were indeed spent assisting the most vulnerable on these islands, instead of throwing figures around.
If he wants to talk about transparency he should start with himself. After all, he keeps reminding us that it is the Dutch taxpayers’ money and it is the Dutch Red Cross. He claims to be extending a hand, but what one should ask is what’s in the hand he is holding behind his back. “Entity.” He keeps saying Dutch money, what does he expect since we are not allowed to borrow without their approval? Read article 29 of the Kingdom Charter.
I believe they can start showing goodwill towards the people of the islands and St. Maarten in particular by cancelling at least 80 to 90 per cent of debt owed to them which is almost Ang. 1 billion.
For the people’s information, the Netherlands after the First World War received aid in the amount of some 1.7 billion dollars. So, asking for debt write-off is not far-fetched.
One thing we must not lose sight of is the fact that the Dutch parliament is 205 years old, the Netherlands Antilles existed for 66 years, the Aruba government has 34 years under her belt and St. Maarten, the new kid on the block, will celebrate 10 years on October 10 of this year.
Mr. Knops remarks about an integral proposal (“entity”) being rejected. He forgot that we are well aware of the Esau and Jacob bible story where Esau let hunger make him lose his birthright. Who in their right mind will allow themselves to be completely recolonized?
Finally, when asked during an interview what is St. Maarten’s Plan B, Prime Minster Silveria Jacobs’ response was, and let me paraphrase, “Stay tuned” and to this I add Plan B is almost ready.
Member of Parliament George Pantophlet
Dear Editor,
It was just a matter of time before PM Mark Rutte’s government presented a “secret entity” for the countries within the Kingdom of the Netherlands. A proposal that given our Kingdom’s constitutional history spanning 400 years should not be a surprise to anyone. The 57-page document was not written out of the blue!
A document rightfully rejected by our Parliament.
Let’s be brutally honest with each other. Yes, we have failed our people miserably in too many ways. We have failed our people for far too long in terms of providing a quality of life and services necessary in a modern civic society. We barely managed our public affairs in relatively prosperous economic times. During less affluent periods or following natural disasters we muddled through. Our government’s liquidity position and financial future have been severely compromised by our completely irresponsible actions in the past.
It doesn’t have to be bleak, but our continuing approach to governance all but ensures a repeat of past mistakes. One of the textbook definitions of madness is repeating the same mistakes over and over again and expecting a different outcome. We have been stuck in this reel for far too long.
The Dutch government knows and can predict our behaviour. We come unprepared to the negotiation table with their representatives and we repeat the same mistakes.
The “CFT” structure established and accepted without a counterproposal in 2007 proved ineffective as an instrument to “guarantee” a sound financial management for St. Maarten and Curaçao, post 10/10/10.
The manner in which the Dutch government seizes the moment under the world COVID-19 pandemic to strategically impose more conditions in return for yet another financial shot in the arm is nothing short of a renewed attempt to bring the former Netherlands Antilles back under one administrative rule in The Hague. We must reject that.
Future generations of public administrators acting in good faith and with integrity who are educated, able and capable, should never be robbed of their future right to govern this island.
Are we destined to choose from two choices as recently suggested by one of our own, drinking champagne or a soda? We must reject the notion that our only choices are between steak and chicken leg. How can the current Dutch government “impose” a reduction of 12.5 per cent on the total package of employment benefits until further notice? By unconditionally accepting all of the above and more, we as a people give up our right to have aspirations, to do better and to lead by example.
If indeed we have “fallen” before and failed 10 times, don’t we have a right to succeed after the 11th or the 12th or umpteenth time and rise to the occasion as many nations have done before us? We firmly believe that there is a great future ahead of us. Many political leaders around the globe made terrible, horrific transgressions against their own citizens. In modern times, these transgressors are held accountable for their actions. We should hold our leaders accountable as well. Their administrations, however, were not taken over directly or indirectly, neither were they annexed nor have they accepted an outside entity to be imposed over their democratically elected Parliament.
The narrative by some local and Dutch entities of the past 10 years states we are incapable of governing ourselves. This story-line culminated in the current stalemate between the “countries” of the former Netherlands Antilles that are again in dire need of financial assistance. While there’s a great deal of truth to that story, it gives the Dutch administration no right to blanket us all as being incapable under the guise of stepping in for the poor people and resort via a backdoor policy of substitution of our representatives. Our democratic institutions including the High Councils of State, our General Audit Chamber, the Ombudsman office will be relegated to substations for the entities in the Hague.
These institutions have proven in the past 10 years that they can do the job. We have nothing more than high praise and respect for those women and men who were appointed to manage these institutions with integrity and professional aptitude since 10/10/10. It is time our citizens demand the same of our elected and appointed representatives. Give us that breathing space.
We can rise to the occasion by taking a more professional approach especially in the case of bilateral meetings with the Dutch government. Bear in mind that PM Mark Rutte faced 6 St. Maarten governments and 3 Parliaments in 10 years. He has been a constant and consistent factor as PM in the ongoing constitutional-financial deliberations facing our local governments.
In the meantime, St. Maarten continues to be under-prepared or unprepared for these important meetings.
For instance, one of our ministers recently lamented he was party to a testy video conference between our PM and State Secretary Knops and it was not recorded! Furthermore, when both our Prime Minister and President of Parliament travelled to The Hague to look Rutte squarely in the eyes in the aftermath of receiving the new and controversial proposal, they allegedly arrived in The Hague and went straight into these critical meetings together with the Minister Plenipotentiary.
Having a mixed team comprising local and Dutch advisors would go a long way to assist our representatives during these difficult meetings.
The current government faces three battles simultaneously on three fronts:
- Post-Hurricane Irma, ongoing reconstruction and allocation of the Trust Fund monies provided by the Dutch tax-payers.
- Current COVID-19-pandemic-forced lockdown and as a result thereof social- economic fall-out.
- Constitutional frictions between the Kingdom partners due to the Dutch government conditions for more financial aid resulting in serious social unrest for the citizens of the smaller entities Curaçao, Aruba and St. Maarten.
After their whirlwind trip, what is next? What is St. Maarten’s Plan B, C, or D?
A few suggestions:
- propose and thoroughly prepare a round-table conference ( RTC) to evaluate the current constitutional structure. This was never done as agreed upon after the deliberations following the November 2006 “Agreement”.
Most bottlenecks are identified in the new Dutch proposal. Why create an entire new entity for six years, while adding Aruba to the mix? A camel with three humps remains a camel.
- CFT was destined to fail in its objective to guide us through sound financial management and balanced budgets because St. Maarten never started with a clean financial slate as promised by our local and Dutch political establishment at the time. CFT should be dismantled and its tasks incorporated into the regular government finance administration. This bottom-up approach can be more effective and less costly to operate than the current top-down structure.
- Appoint a junior minister of constitutional affairs to deal with the ongoing discussions since 10/10/10. The government including the PM can refocus its attention on the “going concern” – the daily management of our country. You have four years to do so. Use the Dutch proposal and execute the tasks as outlined in partnership as a legitimate government, and held accountable by the recently elected Parliament.
We have failed ourselves if we insist and continue to appoint friends, family, or persons whom we know are incompetent or incapable of doing their job paid for by the local or Dutch taxpayers. Nepotism and the like must stop at once.
The footprints of our ancestors are covered by a pile of garbage in our city center.
Parliament is still located in an expensive rented building.
Constitutional history in our school curriculum keeps our students ignorant of current affairs. Our unfinished airport, our gateway to economic recovery is just a fistful of the proverbial rocks that are waiting to be transformed into diamonds.
Until our citizens become better informed and responsible and demand proper and accountable representation, the gap between the wealthy and those who live on the margins of society will become wider with all consequences thereof.
We cannot always point fingers at Holland for that outcome and continue to suffer fools gladly at our own expense.
Gracita Arrindell
Dear Editor,
Many of us will have been impressed by the manner in which our Prime Minister, Ms. Silveria Jacobs, handled the management of borders and infection threat of the COVID-19 epidemic. I certainly was. She indicated in some of her press conferences that she had been following the science-based advice of professionals in the epidemiology field. That was the correct approach and those that ignored the science have caused great damage.
Besides medical science, there is also economic science and this letter is to recommend to our prime minister to follow economic science in the same manner as she has the medical science. Like the medical science, there are large numbers of opinions and views, but in the middle of it all there are strong consensus positions that should be the basis for policy to advance St. Maarten.
In the case of developing countries, a core economic consensus says that an excessive percentage of tax revenues spent on public sector non-investment costs result in restrictions that limit policy-makers in respect of investment that could be used for growth or restructuring of the economy.
In the case of St. Maarten our small scale and our choice of a heavy overhead of Dutch modeled governmental apparatus heightens the risk.
In the case of St. Maarten it has become obvious that political will to restrain this public sector expenditure is not there and that investment always takes a back seat to public sector employment.
The consensus also says that if the developing country tries to escape the high public sector non-investment costs by borrowing new funds then there is a high risk of the country falling into a debt trap as so many Caribbean jurisdictions have. Ironically, this is what the Prime Minister was calling for when she exited the recent Kingdom Ministers Council Meeting attended by the three Caribbean Prime Ministers of the Kingdom.
Efforts to advance long-term policies for St. Maarten that are based on a more sustainable model are often refuted on the basis of them coming from a biased business sector or an autonomy-reducing Kingdom partner, the Netherlands. When it comes to the core science of economic development these are political arguments, not economic science ones. Let’s follow the science in economics as well as medicine.
Robbie Ferron
During the recent press conference, you accused the Dutch Government of applying practices that are typical of the behavior of the West India Company during the colonial period. Indeed, a great deal of commotion has arisen on our islands due to the hurricane behavior of the Dutch government in enforcing reform measures as a condition for financial and economic support.
Everyone can have an opinion, one will believe that the Netherlands has crossed the line, the other will judge that the Netherlands has not gone far enough and should have taken over again long ago.
You yourself drew a comparison with the behavior of the WIC, with which you apparently once again, for the umpteenth time, have tapped out of the colonial keg, a by now cleverly truncated tactic that you apply every time when you are at odds with the motherland.
What you do not realize is that this apparently brutal attitude of Dutch politicians is largely due to their boundless annoyance at the kind of wrong politicians which you are a textbook example of, the kind that plush only aspires to take advantage of and use the obtained state power for their own gain or to favor companions.
Your reign is brimming with scandals, all of which involve scheming shady business models for you and/or your closed ones. I can vividly imagine that the Netherlands has had enough by now and therefore wants to do everything to structurally change that.
Far more reprehensible than the colonizer are the colonizers who take over the colonizer’s misconduct and use their acquired state power for the same opportunism they accuse the colonizer of. You are the archetype of the local politician who once came to power, exhibits the same greedy behavior as the ex-colonizer, a phenomenon so aptly described by writer/psychiatrist/philosopher/freedom fighter/revolutionary Frantz Fanon in his famous oeuvre “The outcasts of the earth”.
You take the place of the WIC, you take over its role because you try to derive the maximum personal advantage from your position of power because you think you have the right to do so. Curaçao, just like the WIC at the time, is also just a playing field for your personal interests. You imagine yourself to be the savior of the people, a delusion that is absolutely incompatible with all those practices that bear your signature, a signature characterized by pushing others forward to conceal your involvement in matters that you know cannot see the daylight.
Our friendly national character, combined with your talented flux de bouche, means that all your deviant behavior is tolerated, to the great frustration of Dutch politicians who have to watch that and are unable to deal with the improper handling of autonomous administrative structures from their Dutch seats to stop politicians like you.
No wonder then that feelings of powerlessness turn into overreactions. Regardless of the outcome of the mission that the Prime Ministers from Aruba and Curaçao have undertaken to the Netherlands, our island will have no solution as long as WIC-like administrators like you are not replaced by sincere and knowledgeable ministers who have people’s interests in mind.
The call for a business cabinet is getting louder and more rightly, because your narrow-minded attitude shows that no improvement can be expected to upscale the administrative thinking of this government.
George Lichtveld
Curaçao
