Dear Editor:
In Sint Eustatius one constantly hears that the island is “in much need of development.” Development will bring much needed change ultimately solving the island’s many challenges. We are further told that development will “build economic resilience and create much needed employment”. Interestingly, it seems like the only kind of development being touted is tourism, and if you are critical of the traditional touristic model of development, then you are categorized as negative, anti-development and against progress.
In his 1992 book Sint Eustatius: Treasure Island of the Caribbean, Eric O. Ayisi stated that Sint Eustatius is hooked on tourism “something it has neither the facilities nor the capabilities to handle.” In 2019, Ayisi’s statement remains valid. There is a limited food and water supply, no sewage system, roaming animals, and during many months the island is dry and dusty. In addition to this, there is limited connectivity and the price of a Winair ticket from St. Maarten is forever increasing.
Interestingly, research illustrates that the traditional touristic model is not very beneficial to those Caribbean islands relying on it. While the Caribbean is characterized as a “tropical paradise”, for every dollar generated by tourism, about thirty cents remains on the island. Additionally, there has been an increase in literature discussing how tourism in the Caribbean is an outgrowth of the colonial model because it includes selling the single product of “tropical paradise” to North American and European markets, making it very similar to the historical mono-crop agricultural plantation economy.
And what of economic resilience and the job creation? The fact is that tourism primarily brings very low paid service employment to the local population. The local population primarily become “the help” providing service with a smile. In essence they become prisoners by, once again, a mono economy, and the local “primitive” must do as he/she is instructed to do. Essentially the local becomes invisible, non-human and part of the natural landscape to be enjoyed by the tourist. Thus, the idea of “tropical paradise” is a demented fantasy, a social fabrication.
In Sint Eustatius, one often hears that the island does not seek to develop mass tourism, but rather, sustainable tourism. Sustainable tourism is the concept of visiting a place as a tourist and trying to make only a positive impact on the environment, society and economy. The type of sustainable tourism currently being touted for development is ecotourism and is directed toward exotic, often threatened, natural environments, especially to support conservation efforts and observe wildlife.
But “sustainable” is an elusive concept as its scope and practice often has little or nothing to do with protecting the people or the environment. According to Mimi Shelter, while the tourist industry requires an endless supply of pristine beaches, untouched coves and emerald pools, coral reefs, native wildlife, natural hiking trails, etc., many islands, such as Sint Eustatius, struggle with the energy, water and sewage demands with sewage often being returned to the same sea in which people swim.
Ayisi provides an alternative to the traditional tourist model when he states that “urban development needs to be controlled and should not be allowed to consume the fertile land that could be used for food cultivation.” Rather “the type of endeavor suitable to the island’s resources would be developing industries in farming and fisheries, and then using tourism as an ancillary to these industries.” Thus, the government should use moral suasion to attract investors who are not only concerned with development for personal profit, but concerned and interested in providing the necessary support for the primary challenges the island faces. Examples of investments include a proper integrated watershed environment, experimentation with animal husbandry and care, hydroponic farming of agricultural and fodder crops, information technology etc. Tourists who come to the island could include people willing to assist with the development of these industries or simply those who admire the island’s approach toward development.
The antiquated type of tourism being sought in Sint Eustatius, which includes investors who are only interested in personal economic gain via exploitation, is increasingly being critiqued through a moral lens. There is already a great deal of data showing that this form of development will only deplete the island’s resources, further the economic divide between rich and poor and push the local population into perpetual poverty. If Sint Eustatius actually wants to develop, the island’s resources (land) must not be exploited and eliminated but enhanced through sustainable practices. Most importantly, local people must become the stewards of their island and these practices, not servants to tourists.
The EUX Writers Club
The pen is mightier than the sword
SRA, HJR, TEL
Dear Editor,
The title above has led to the introduction of this piece of writing, so that lay-people can understand the terminologies of the different types of business organizations on the island. A Private sector business is one owned by the person who created it with an objective to make a profit. A Public sector organization is owned by the population, or the citizens of the state – the taxpayers.
A Public Corporation and other public service agencies are created by an Act of parliament by a minister responsible for the trading activity with the general public. These organizations are managed by a board appointed by the minister, for the daily operation on behalf of the public. The board must be held responsible for the way they make use of public funds. State corporations and public service agencies are established to provide essential goods and services to the population not for a big profit, but what the public could afford to pay for them.
The people running the operations must not be self-selected: have no political affiliation, knowledgeable, honest, helpful, and not professional business people. Transparency is very important for public sector organizations.
Non-profit organizations including Foundations are part of the private sector businesses. These organizations are owned by their members. Housing Foundation is a typical example of this group.
Abraham Maslow, a famous psychologist in the 1940s, created the hierarchy of needs. He listed the top three basic needs in his book for human survival as: food, clothing, and shelter. Shelter-housing is an enormous challenge for the government these days. Homelessness is on the rise and required urgent attention to provide more affordable homes to people at a very low cost.
The Housing sector is too important to be in the hands of a “Foundation”. A foundation is not a public corporation, or a public service agency. The public must have a say in advising the board, the minister, and parliament on important issues affecting the tenants in the housing scheme.
A sole proprietorship business is owned by one individual, and is part of the private sector organizations. A partnership is owned by the partners who created it, and is part of the private sector businesses. Private and public limited liability companies are owned by the shareholders, and are also part of the private sector organizations.
Public Corporations and other public service agencies are owned by the public or the taxpayers in the country. They are created by the government in an act of parliament to provide important goods and services to the population at a low cost. In the case of housing, the board responsible to the minister must publish issues affecting the public and provide financial report to the minister for the public to be aware of what is taking place in the housing scheme. They must provide the result of the trading to show how much money has been available, and how it has been used. The board must have an independent committee to question parliament on general matters pertaining to the service operation in the public.
Housing is an important service to the community, and must be under government and the public control. It should not be left in private hands such as a foundation, because human lives and essential services are at risk, especially now that the hurricane season is approaching. The government is the major shareholder in these corporations and service agencies. Therefore, the price of house rent shouldn’t be so high.
Tenants are actually paying more for rent for public housing than their basic monthly salary. For the elderly, rent is almost twice their pension allowances. This shouldn’t be! A balance must be met between not for profitable gains, but for a basic need of the community.
In closing, public corporations are not created as profit-oriented organizations, and must keep proper records to show their financial positions to the public.
Joseph Harvey
Dear Editor,
More than 18 months after [Hurricane – Ed.] Irma, recovery projects move forward at a snail’s pace. Should we mention the roof repair program? The dump? Wreck removal and clean-up?
Contrary to the negative, there are some positive developments, some resorts and hotels remain open and more are opening up. There is a training program, the resilience of especially the small- to medium-size businesses on the island is remarkable, but to see marked improvement, we need a strong push toward quality management of the airport and we need an increase in stayover tourism and airlift.
For those who have been clamoring against the appointment of a Dutch member of the management team and supervisory board, primarily based on their belief that St. Maarten can do it by itself: The past 18+ months prove the opposite. Yes, we have an airport that re-opened on 10/10/17 to commercial traffic, which in itself is commendable, but we have to achieve far more. We cannot be complacent with the sympathy of our visitors that have empathy of what the island went through. Almost 2 years after the passing of Irma that empathy/sympathy grows thinner every day.
Most developments over the past few months, be they political, governmental, economical, environmental or recovery related, have not been positive. Many of these developments were not caused by Hurricane Irma.
We would have hoped more from some parts of Government, by providing a substantive vision for the road ahead ’til date. There is now an NRRP, and a damage and loss assessment – but not a coherent vision of how to actually accomplish Building Back St. Maarten better.
The next logical step would have been to develop a prioritized list of damage to fix, losses to cover and needs to be met. Unfortunately, that did not happen. Government has not and is not taking the lead in the recovery effort. Every report clearly states that St. Maarten is in charge of prioritizing and planning. Instead of doing so we are seemingly leaving the future of the country in the hands of World Bank planners.
That same level of influence and urgency was applied to the Government-owned companies. While some of these were able to rise to the occasion and restored services to the community as fast as possible, the same can, unfortunately, not be said about the Airport. Steps need to be taken immediately to make this national business card of the island, the first and last impression, a functioning and attractive one.
In Parliament, it has been business as usual for the past 10 years. A couple of members have legal problems, important reports by the Audit Chamber and the Judicial Council are being ignored.
What would have been a small, but very symbolic gesture to the population of the country to reduce the members’ salaries did not occur. Although the salary reduction was a homegrown suggestion, we have to wait until the Dutch impose it as a new condition, so now we have someone to blame. When a simple opportunity to clearly show solidarity with the people in contributing to our collective recovery is not taken, one resorts to questioning motivation of efforts.
In the extended meantime, Parliament has also been ignoring the fact that the rest of the world develops new standards for countries to live by, including environmental standards, quality of life standards and financial oversight standards, to name a few.
There are at the moment 2 ordinances that need to be introduced (the infrastructure for participating in the Common Reporting Standard) or amended (the FIU extended reporting for unusual financial transactions). These new standards are specifically designed to prevent abuse of harmful tax facilities, money-laundering and financing of terrorism. Things that all St. Maarteners should support.
Both proposals have met with resistance in Parliament from both opposition and coalition parties. The opposing Members of Parliament may have their reasons, “it doesn’t directly benefit St. Maarteners,” “it allows the Minister to make changes without approval of Parliament” (which in itself is a very good reason to oppose proposals). There are other reasons such as cumbersome banking policies that make it difficult for residents and local businesses to bank which at the heart do not have anything to do with these two ordinances but should be addressed elsewhere.
SHTA would like to mention that there are also serious negative consequences, i.e. RISKS, of not adopting these specific pieces of legislation. Not participating could very well mean the loss of Correspondent Banking relationships between our local banks and banks located in North America and the EU, which are adverse to any perceived risks in particular as it relates to money-laundering and the financing of terrorism.
Perhaps, many St. Maarteners do not need access to international banks, but most businesses, including all of our grocery stores, do; and if you think that international money transfers are expensive and take time now, wait until it happens that our international banking relationships are frozen.
If such an event would occur, it could be related to the days post-Irma, when the airport was closed to commercial flights and one had to beg and plead, wait in line in the sun or leverage a connection to be evacuated. In other words, without a sound and properly managed port (airport, seaport or financial port) all traffic stops.
Whether we like it or not, our banking system is reliant on correspondent banks to process transactions. If local banks lose those relationships, it can effectively isolate our financial infrastructure, making prices of transfers higher and more cumbersome. This will lead to higher prices in supermarkets and shops for every resident, as well as every visitor. It will make our hotels, which largely receive money from clients abroad, have a more difficult time to actually receive their payments and in turn could have a negative effect on their ability to pay their staff.
Our tourism product and our population will suffer. Our already too slow recovery will be set back and opportunity for future development will dwindle. Foreign direct investment, whatever is left of it, will likely completely dry up.
SHTA would like to emphasize to our parliament that St. Maarten does not exist in a vacuum; making a decision positive, negative or stalled each have consequences. These financial proposals have been in development for years. St. Maarten has had ample opportunity to put forward legislation that would receive parliamentary approval, but has failed to do so.
Wasting time now and stalling the process further is tantamount to playing economic Russian roulette; and considering the current state of the recovery we’ve already pushed our luck.
St. Maarten Hospitality and Trade Association (SHTA)
Dear Editor,
For the past months we have had meetings in Parliament to try to address the laws pertaining to the FATF (Financial Action Task Force) guidelines.
We even had members of the Caribbean FATF come to parliament and explain these guidelines as well the urgency of living up to these guidelines.
Yet many times no quorum was achieved in order to handle such important legislation which at the end of the day is unfortunate and could have major consequences for our island.
To me it has always been very clear that while some of these laws are clearly being pushed by the more powerful countries of the World to regulate the flow of money, it is the new reality we have to deal with in this online digital world where we are now dependent on credit card and debit card transactions.
In many ways our economy is still a cash-based economy but more and more this is changing as people shop online and travel the world.
Yet the persons who now fuel our economy via the tourism and business industry are now dependent on digital transactions. Our tourists expect to use their debit cards and credit cards when visiting our island.
We live in an online world and St. Maarten will be no exception. As a matter of fact, the entire Caribbean is confronted with these guidelines.
These are some of the potential consequences of being blacklisted which really concern me:
- St. Maarten could face even more negative international press as it is put on the blacklist. Unfortunately, the average person who may want to visit St. Maarten and reads about this would probably think twice and choose another island to visit. While it is easy to get on the blacklist, it is much harder to clean up the negative image it leaves behind. The word “blacklist” is one understood across languages as something negative.
- Our local banks could be denied access to correspondent banks. As a result, visitors in St. Maarten would not be able to use their internationally accepted debit and credit cards, because our banks can no longer clear these transactions without correspondent banking.
- The local merchants and businesses could be impacted as they will have to find other ways to pay for the merchandise and imports. They would have to rely on cash transactions which would surely not be feasible for the great majority of businesses since it would also mean having to travel with large sums of cash which is not only dangerous but is also illegal if limits are surpassed. This would potentially cripple our businesses which rely primarily on imports. This could increase even more the cost of goods as the companies struggle to keep supplies coming and shelves stocked.
- Serious investors could stay away from St. Maarten as they would realize the difficulties and negative image of doing business on an island which is blacklisted.
- Our Government-owned companies could be affected as they struggle to pay their international suppliers. In the case of TelEm this could have an impact on our connectivity with the world, as Internet and telephone will become local only when no international telecommunications company will make agreements with TelEm to allow connectivity with international networks if they cannot clear the payment online. TelEm will not be able to do so because our banks will no longer be able to support such transactions due to lack of correspondent banking.
- St. Maarten’s hub function of our harbor and airport, which is something we have bragged about for years and which is a key factor in the success of our economy, will be negatively impacted as investors, businesses and tourists look to other islands.
- Our society would have to become one dependent solely on cash with bigger risks of crime as people and businesses will have to deal in cash. As our local banks are all branches of international banks, we could see the closing of these branches as these banks cannot build a sustainable and viable business based only on cash transactions.
- Our local banks would not be able to leverage their deposits on the capital market to allow for debt financing, mortgages, etc. on the island. Businesses and people will suffer as a consequence and those services will no longer be available.
- Our hotels could be directly impacted as they will not be able to secure reservations and conference bookings via credit card and online transactions. The Airbnb market which St. Maarten is very much reliant on post-Irma while so many of our hotels strive to rebuild will be crippled as local owners are unable to process transactions because of the lack of correspondent banking.
- Our car rentals could be seriously affected as they presently rely almost entirely on online reservations in which credit card financial transactions not only secure reservations but also pay for the rental cost of the vehicles as well as cover any damage incurred to the vehicle.
- Our ability as an island to refer our patients abroad could be affected by the unavailability of correspondent banking in order to execute online payments to the countries providing the care to our people.
- Our people would no longer be able to shop online as the local banks lose correspondent banking facilities.
As the SMCP Member of Parliament, I believe it is incumbent on us to make sure we protect our island against the consequences created by our failure to live up to international standards such as those of the FATF.
I see it as our new reality as we have chosen for status aparte. Whether we like it or not we are now, more than ever, part of the international community and will be held to those standards. Therefore, we must protect our image on an international stage when it comes to combating money-laundering and terrorism-funding.
We should not wait to be blacklisted or receive conditions from the Dutch before we move.
These laws will be brought to the floor of parliament once more on Wednesday, May 8, and I hope, as a parliament, we will pass them in the interest of our island’s economy and people as we seek to rebuild from Irma.
Claude “Chacho” Peterson
The confrontations we faces
In life
should never be about winning
Nor losing
For Everyone needs to win.
At the same time,
Nobody wants to lose.
So if we have te chose
The best way out
Of this here Dilemma
Is to avoid ah Drama
by finding a good Agreement
Making a settlement
In spite of our sentiment
For in the end
No one ever really wins
In these battles of life
It is how much we lose
loss of time
loss of energy
loss of Friends
Loss ah Husband
Loss of wife
Yeh could even lose
Yeh life
And most of the time
Just for ah little strife
But with a good compromise
you will save time
lots of energy
Save your own life
And sometimes even gain
A friend
The Battle we need te win
is against our own fears
it’s against our doubts
And sometime we own
Damn mouth
For the biggest battle you
could ever win is the control
of your TONGUE
Control your temper
A still tongue
keep Ah wise head
Remember
Don’t lose your Head
Cauz yeh Tongue is in it
And like a snake
one RATTLE
AND Yeh done lost that BATTLE
Raymond Helligar aka “Big Ray”
