Dear Editor,
The SMCP representatives in Parliament and Government recently reiterated their position on a self-imposed reduction of 10 per cent of their salary, while urging their colleagues in Parliament to follow suit.
This is admirable. However, the proposal clearly misses the point. It is like taking an aspirin for a headache while our community continues to suffer chronic migraines.
The SMCP proposal takes a nibble out of their paycheck, to donate this amount to a charitable organization of their choice. For all intents and purposes, this act of “generosity” barely touches the real issue at hand, which is to substantially reduce the deficit in the proposed 2019 budget. A more meaningful proposal would be a 50 per cent salary reduction. This would imply that the elected and appointed representatives are serious about making a significant contribution to trimming some excess fat from our budget. Anything less is “nickel-and-diming” our citizens again.
The reason for establishing this salary at the time was, among others, to attract educated, experienced persons who would otherwise go to work in the private sector.
Possibly the high remuneration did attract some business people to seek higher office, arguably hardly the best or the brightest. In addition to those who already have a regular job the position of an elected member of parliament was meant to be a full-time job.
Honestly, the issue is not even about the relatively lucrative salary. It is about the ethical or moral obligation to show support as a people’s representative without being pressured to do so by Holland or anyone else. It is about showing true solidarity with the plight of the people.
Immediately following the passing of Hurricanes Irma and Maria, we supported the calls to Parliament to show some solidarity with the thousands of men and women who at the time lost their jobs in the aftermath of the hurricanes.
Many of our law-abiding citizens today are still struggling to make ends meet.
Parliament can truly represent the people and pass the law to legally enact the salary adjustment, temporarily or permanently. The monies derived from the salary cuts must be designated to a post in the budget that benefits our children, our future.
Anything less will be cherry-picking and would reek of favoritism.
While the current budget debate continues in the House of Parliament, the legislative branch can take the lead in making the proposals to adjust the salaries. Present the motion followed by a draft legislation in Parliament and put it to a vote, for or against!
There’s a lot at stake for the people of St. Maarten. There’s a lot at stake for (legitimate) businesses in St. Maarten. There’s a lot at stake for the future generations of St. Maarteners. Reducing poverty and the overall high cost of living in St. Maarten, among other pressing matters that affect the overall quality of life of our citizens. Remember that for decades, the average man, woman, young families can’t get a break not even to save a cent with the low interest rates on savings.
The question becomes at the end of the budget debate, will our citizens see any significant changes to their benefit, or will they be shortchanged again by their current elected representatives in Parliament? Only time will tell.
Gracita Arrindell, Leader
People’s Progressive Alliance (PPA)
Dear Editor,
The employees of the St. Maarten Points Blanche prison have voiced their concerns on the Parliamentary public meeting #31, dated May 29, 2019. According to the committee representing the workers of the prison, the parliamentarians were distributing misinformation about the prison in the public meeting.
We have the following concerns:
- Personnel matters and working conditions.
- Making publicly incorrect accusations and insinuations on worker(s) functioning in high-ranking positions, namely, “mentioning that firearm(s) was/were brought into the prison under their supervision which caused the death of an inmate.”
- Making wrongful and/or misleading announcements/statements such as endangering the lives of prison personnel.
- Changes of prison management St. Maarten.
According to the committee members who have the mandate from personnel of the house of detention, we have already sent 2 letters to the house of Parliament requesting a meeting to inform and clarify the misinformation existing in the Parliament.
We must not forget that the members of parliament are the representatives of the people of St. Maarten, and not a selected person or persons. We, the workers of the prison, feel ourselves not represented in parliament by the elected members of parliament.
We are of the opinion that the parliament members should research matters first, ask questions to correctly inform the people in society. We believe that members of parliament should not engage in personal attacks and innuendos against any prison official or anyone in this society, thereby putting the prison and its workers in a negative light. This is in our opinion very unprofessional and of minimal standard.
The committee is requesting a meeting with the house of parliament to bring the truth on the situation at the house of detention forward. In this meeting, they also wish to elaborate on a letter sent to the House of Parliament dated June 1, 2019.
St. Maarten House of Detention
Dear Editor,
This article is for people to identify themselves for who they really are when it comes to politics.
The electorate in St. Maarten really needs a crash course on this subject because it can avoid the confusion that we have presently in our government.
Lesson number 1: You do not have to agree but to understand. To understand is for you to know if an opinion or a value or an ideology is of good or bad purpose.
In politics whenever a person postulates themselves make it your business to find out about their character. Do not be deceived by an image because they look good or dress well and speak well and because they have a good education. Find out what they stand for and their moral values.
Politics is all about ideology. A politician can be well educated, but if he or she believes in (wealth redistribution) to take money from people who work and give it to other people who do not want to work, would you vote for that person? Would you vote for a politician that has five Master’s degrees but he or she think pedophilia is a human right? If the candidate is a very nice person but they do not believe in God would you vote for that person?
If a candidate has a Master’s in economics but he or she believes abortion is a woman’s right and he or she believes in bestiality would you vote for that person? If a candidate has a Master’s in business management and is fluent in 5 languages, but he or she believes in promoting homosexuality and that there are 10 genders would you vote for him or her?
Would you vote for a politician if he or she believes illegal immigrants have just as many rights or even more right here in St. Maarten than the Dutch citizens of St. Maarten, would you vote for him or her?
When it comes to politics, character and ideology is the key, because your values are how you see the world, and how the individual would like the world to be defines that person’s character.
If you vote for an educated person, but they believe in corruption and in conning people would you vote for that person? The politics in St. Maarten is at a very low standard. We must raise the level or else it will continue to get worse.
The main two ideologies are Conservatism and Liberalism. Liberals believe in government action to achieve equal opportunity and equality for all. It is the duty of the government to alleviate social ills and to protect civil liberties and individual and human rights. Liberals believe the role of the government should be to guarantee that no one is in need. Liberal policies generally emphasize the need for the government to solve problems.
Conservatives believe in personal responsibility, limited government, free markets, individual liberty, traditional moral values, and a strong national defense. Conservatives believe the role of government should be to provide people the freedom necessary to pursue their own goals. Conservative policies generally emphasize empowerment of the individual to solve problems.
Liberal values are abortion is a woman right and agree with same-sex marriage and in wealth redistribution and taxing a challenge if the law cannot stop it. Liberals believe in the separation of the church from state.
Conservatives are usually against abortion, disagree with same-sex marriage, believe in low taxes and push individual empowerment. Conservatives believe in the separation of the church from the state, but not from God.
When you swear to perform your task of the country it is done with your hand on the Bible, which means you are telling the people of the country as God is your witness you will do your task and duty honestly.
Whenever you vote for a party ask them what is their ideology, ask the candidate what is his or her ideology. You cannot be of conservative value in a liberal party, it will never work because your approach to financial issues and social issues is exactly contrary.
Remember the number 1 lesson in political ideology, you do not have to agree, but to understand. Your understanding of the issues defines who you are. You cannot put Satan in Government and expect to get a Godly society it is just not possible.
Choices have consequences. Choose wisely. As for me, I am conservative.
The Patriot Miguel Arrindell
Dear Editor,
It is about time we put an end to the ongoing atrocities in our country, and most importantly, actions undertaken against our political leaders!
We have all taken note last week of the most recent proof of abuse of power, lack of any basic level of compassion, and what can be considered as a serious violation of basic human rights committed by the judicial authorities in Sint Maarten against our political leader Theo Heyliger.
It appears, from the publication in The Daily Herald of June 17, 2019, that the detained political leader was being denied access to urgent medical care in the USA. According to the article mentioned: “Theodore Heyliger is said to be blocked from leaving the country to get treatment for his stage one kidney cancer” and reports reaching us from Curaçao indicated that said passport was reported stolen, hindering from getting his visa for travel. It is at this early stage when medical care is most important and not when it has already reached stage 3 or 4 if a life needs to be saved.
Let me be clear before going any further!
By no means should this publication by me be seen and considered as a means to downplay or mitigate any wrongdoings, committed – if proven – by any person, and that includes any member of our party and this applies to our political leader, who has been persecuted and prosecuted already for months now. No one, including prosecutors, should be considered “above the law”! But everyone is innocent until proven guilty.
Furthermore, the quintessence of our observations, as dealt with in this publication, apply generally for everyone, guilty or not, since it relates to the basic human rights that do not discriminate between these two categories.
It is interesting to outline how these basic rights are protected in Europe:
European Court Of Human Rights, Kotsaftis v. Greece,12 June 2008: The applicant, who was suffering from cirrhosis of the liver caused by chronic hepatitis B, complained about the conditions of his detention on account, in particular, of the lack of treatment appropriate to his state of health. In March 2007, under Rule 39 (interim measures) of the Rules of Court, the Court requested Greece to order the transfer of the applicant to a specialized medical center so that he could undergo all the necessary tests and remain in hospital until his doctors considered that he could return to prison without his life being endangered.
The Court held that there had been a violation of Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) of the Convention, finding that, during the period between 9 June 2006 and 15 March 2007, the Greek authorities had not fulfilled their obligation to safeguard the applicant’s physical integrity, in particular by providing him with the appropriate medical care.
The Court noted in particular that, during that period, contrary to the findings of the expert reports drawn up, the applicant had been kept in detention without being given a special diet or treatment with the appropriate drugs, and had not undergone tests in a specialist medical center. Moreover, an operation scheduled for a particular date had not been performed until one year later.
The Court also deplored the fact that the applicant, who was suffering from a serious and highly infectious disease, had been detained along with 10 other prisoners in a cell measuring 24 square meters.
Lastly, despite the fact that the competent authorities had been informed that he was suffering from cirrhosis and that his condition necessitated appropriate treatment, it was not until measures had been indicated by the Court that the applicant began to receive regular check-ups.
Note: Just one out of numerous examples put before the court and related to prisoners’ health-related rights
Regarding Mr. Heyliger’s life-threatening situation that might lead to his early death, apparently deliberately obstructing his possibility to undergo adequate advance medical treatment by a reputable medical institution of his choice in the USA, or wherever else for that matter, can be considered not only as a despicable act by those in charge but as a serious deliberate violation and breach of Theo’s basic human rights.
It is therefore that we have taken upon us to report this serious violation and atrocities and file an official complaint to the relevant international institutions, such as:
* European Convention of Human Rights, Strasbourg
* European Court of Human Rights, Strasbourg
* European Institution Office of Amnesty International, Brussels
* Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights, Oxford
* Human Rights Watch Foundation, the Netherlands, The Hague
* Human Rights Watch, headquarters, in New York City
* Liberty Privacy International, London
* Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), Geneva
We will therefore not rest until true justice is served in this matter and immediate action is undertaken by the relevant judicial and other authorities to ensure that Mr. Heyliger’s basic human rights are respected and met, and he travels abroad without interruption and false alarms of lost passports to undergo the medical treatment necessary to enhance his life expectancy!
We will otherwise hold accountable any institution that acts otherwise, and which continues to obstruct the rehabilitation of Mr. Theodore Heyliger. God forbid should any harm occur to our leader!
Josianne Fleming Artsen
Dear Editor,
Nowadays, I still wonder how our parents got the news so fast when radios and telephones were luxuries. Because even with the technology nowadays, the message is not as accurate as then. What I think is that technology is only second to the Almighty when it concerns hidden secrets. It is just that the different entities take interest in what concerns them.
