Dear Editor,
Operating utility companies like GEBE is a relatively difficult management challenge. With most companies (NV’s) the challenge is to make a profit. In the case of a state-owned enterprise like GEBE, the focus is less on making a profit but more on other things. Like all companies it is the shareholder who ultimately determines the direction of the company, and in the case of GEBE the question is what guidance was given to supervisory boards and management. GEBE has a wide range of tasks. They have to produce power and water and also have to manage the distribution.
In the case of water, they have private sector producers who have deep experience in the business of desalination production so their risk is reduced.
In the case of power production they are all on their own and there is only one way of producing it; by running large engines which have a huge capital cost and are not quickly replaceable. The greatest company mission is to keep meeting demand.
My guess is that the focus of the shareholder was mostly on job creation, employee contentment and there was little focus by the shareholder on the risk of not meeting demand in spite of the fact that demand increase was likely to grow rapidly as construction was stimulated in an effort to keep growth in the economy. It’s just a guess though!
The production of power requires long forward planning and financing. There is only one method of producing and to upgrade this method requires a long lead time.
With the lack of transparency that exists in state-owned companies in our system we will never know whether the need for the forward planning was done by the operators of GEBE, nor how it was responded to by the shareholder.
It would give the population confidence in our future if non-political entities with experience in the utility sector and particularly power production could investigate and provide insight into the circumstances that led the country down the path that led to the load shedding and disruption that is being experienced.
Robbie Ferron
Dear Editor,
This election has brought forward candidates driven by self-interest and hatred, unlike any previous elections. I cannot claim to be optimistic when reality reflects pessimism.
It seems that people are being misled into believing that education alone qualifies one for political leadership, which is not entirely true.
In St. Maarten, political parties seem to lack strong ideological foundations and appear to be driven more by personal preferences rather than principled ideologies.
For instance, it is perplexing to see individuals swiftly switching from one party to another within three months without any apparent alignment with a particular set of values or ideologies.
Political ideologies represent a set of interconnected beliefs concerning political theory and social policy.
I am eager to understand the distinctions between the NA, UPP, and SAM political parties, as well as the disparities between DP, PFP, and URSM. Furthermore, I am interested in comprehending the differences between NOW and ECE.
Specifically, I seek an understanding of each party’s ideology, and the basis on which they consider themselves the most suitable political entity to lead, taking into account their policies and principles.
It is crucial to comprehend what the people of St. Maarten value, be it Christianity, homosexuality, or a more liberal or conservative approach. While I acknowledge that abortion and homosexuality are legally and socially sanctioned within our European parliamentary system, I am keen to understand whether they align with the core values of St. Maarten. Moreover, I am interested in knowing the stances of the political parties on these issues.
The moral character of a political party is of paramount importance, regardless of individual opinions.
Therefore, it is imperative to know where each party stands on moral issues. Candidates should not be supported without a clear understanding of their stance.
I firmly believe that a candidate’s qualifications should not solely be based on educational achievements. A person with numerous master’s degrees may not be fit to lead if they exhibit immoral behavior, such as being a criminal or engaging in activities like pedophilia or bestiality.
Clarity is needed on why certain immoral acts are deemed acceptable while others are condemned, and who is responsible for making such determinations.
It is the right of the electorate to be informed of the candidates' positions on key issues. This transparency is fundamental to the democratic process.
Unfortunately, the media in St. Maarten seem reticent in their role to question candidates about their ideologies and moral standings, contributing to the chaos in St.Maarten.
In conclusion, I urge the electorate to demand transparency from political candidates.
We must insist on knowing why they align with a particular party and what values drive them.
We need the brutal truth. Understanding may be uncomfortable, but it is essential to gauge the authenticity of their beliefs.
The Patriot Miguel Arrindell
Dear Editor,
What’s on my mind – ENNIA! And we as we are yet again in another the wonderful time of election, we should all be watching the action or non-action of parliament!
As one of the approximate 3,000 Ennia policy holders in SXM, I am paying keen attention whether the current Members of Parliament of St. Maarten will approve or reject the solution presented whereby CUR-SXM-CBCS will have to contribute to ensure that Ennia doesn’t go bankrupt, thereby ensuring the pensions of the policy holders of Ennia.
Yes, we are all hoping that the monies will be recovered from those that plundered the Ennia coffers, some claiming plausible deniability, but that case is in court and it can take years before and if the moneys are recovered.
It would mean that:
- Curaçao for its approximately 27,000 pensioners will have to contribute (reserve) ANG 22 million per year on their budget (for 30 years)
- SXM for its approximately 3,000 pensioners will have to contribute (reserve) ANG 2.3 million per year on their budget (for 30 years)
- CBCS will contribute ANG 15 million per year
It is a big consequence to taxpayers of Curaçao and SXM and the Ennia policy holders because THEY WERE NOT
1. behind the wheel with their foot on the gas pedal when taking or allowing money to be taken out of Ennia
2. at the helm of CBCS who should have been supervising Ennia and allowed the money flight from Ennia;
3. in government who ultimately decides who runs and supervises the CBCS.
In the meantime, here are some comments out there about this topic:
A. Ennia is a Curaçao company and not SXM problem – Uhm, Ennia was established when both Curaçao and SXM were part of the Netherlands Antilles, SXM has a branch, so stop that nonsense and stop trying to confuse people.
B. Let Ennia go bankrupt – Easy to say if your household is not affected; so those who have Ennia pensions in St. Maarten don’t matter? Another Uhm, messing with people’s pensions at any time is unacceptable.
C. Let the APS take over these pensioners – Ahh yes, the APS, savior of all financial issues of SXM, whatever money is needed just go to the APS, they can finance. This is easier said than done, nothing is in place for this. Again, an easy and simple solution.
D. This solution be a higher cost to the taxpayers – Nice deflection, but tell the whole story.
SXM has loans to the tune of ANG 316.4 Million with a current interest rate of 3.1%.
Failure for parliament to approve the provided Ennia solution before elections may result in SXM interest rate being increased to a minimum 5.9% but up to 8% (which means a minimum of ANG 12.7 Million extra in interest a year!)
I guess throwing that money away on a yearly basis, is no problem for SXM, we are rolling in the dough.
Now the reality: As we do not have a crystal ball and there are people already on pension or going on pension who have Ennia policies a solution had to found.
Food for thought: 3,000 disgruntled Ennia policy holders and their voting family members in SXM could easily result in almost half of the voting population of SXM which during last election were only 14,443 (at least valid votes).
It is “Speak Now, Or Forever Hold Your Peace” time. We all stay quiet and accept what comes our way, but some things need to be said.
Name withheld at author’s request.
Dear Editor,
St. Maarten’s political culture has been marred by vote buying for as long as I can remember.
Some may say it can’t ever change; it’s who we are. I disagree. I think it can change but the root causes of these issues, the reason why it is so prevalent needs to be tackled.
In my opinion, the Government, your elected officials, should look out for your best interest through a clear vision for the country, effective policy making and the enforcement of our country’s laws. Purchasing an AC unit or paying your GEBE bill for the month is the opposite of those things. Buying your vote is actually shutting you up, taking away your power, until the next election rolls around.
For years now the following phrases have been heard throughout our community: “I’m going to sell my vote because nothing will change anyway so at least I can get something out of it that I need” or “I’m not going to vote because I’m upset and tired and nothing will change anyway.”
Let’s look at the first perspective: “Nothing will change anyway so let me look out for me.” Looking out for yourself through selling your vote for an item or money is exactly what politicians do when they sell out this country to a developer. They pocket a fee, they allow concrete to be poured and they take no measures to ensure that you will have employment or that your wages will be fair. The persons who buy your vote are the same ones who create this unfair, unequal society that we currently live in. They are looking out for their pockets just like you are looking out for yours. And it’s not fair. You should not be a beggar in your own country. But they are in positions of power because of it, they live in nice houses while you are struggling to make ends meet. Life is becoming harder but that vote of yours is precious; don’t sell it!
Let’s look at the second perspective: “Nothing will change anyway so I’m not going to vote.” Election fatigue is real and understandable. It feels like you’re in the twilight zone and going insane because you keep doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. “Why should you have respect for our democracy when many politicians don’t have respect for you?” Not all politicians are the same. Some of us do respect you and want to work to truly improve your life! If you honor your right to choose, to make a decision and vote for a person that can represent you on the values and principles you live by, then you are standing up against corruption and ego. You are saying that you will continue to do that part of your job as a citizen of the country, for your children and their children even if you can’t see the change you think you should see now.
Don’t let those that cause instability win. Don’t let them break your spirit, because if you stay home, they will get back in. They’re buying votes to get back in. They’re desperate to get back in.
There was an article recently that stated that St. Maarten has the most cases of corruption within the Kingdom. When I read it, it reminded me of one of my favorite quotes by Nigerian author Chimamanda Adichie that goes; “The single story creates stereotypes, and the problem with stereotypes is not that they aren’t true, but that they are incomplete. They make one story become the only story.”
Let’s change some of the stories on St. Maarten that make us angry and tired and ashamed. Together we can – by you voting not because someone gave you something, but because you have seen this person work in your community and have a feel for who they are; kind, honest, competent, educated and experienced enough to take this country into a more sustainable future.
Let’s change the stereotype that all politicians on St. Maarten are corrupt. That our people are easily bought. That our country will continue to be sold out by people looking out only for themselves.
August 19th is that opportunity to create a new story.
Solange Ludmila Duncan
Candidate 11
Party for Progress
Dear Editor,
In 2012 St. Maarten underwent a Caribbean Financial Action Task Force (CFATF) Mutual
Evaluation and its results were alarming. St. Maarten will be reviewed once more by a team of international assessors from the CFATF, starting September 16, 2024, for about two weeks. This review considers St. Maarten’s compliance with the Financial Action Task Force’s (FATF’s) 40 Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Recommendations and the FATF as part of a coordinated worldwide approach to fighting organized crime, corruption, and terrorism.
Understanding the CFATF
Through the Kingdom of the Netherlands, St. Maarten participates in the FATF, which sets international standards to guarantee national authorities can efficiently pursue illegal funds connected to drugs trafficking, the illicit arms trade, human trafficking, cybercrime, money laundering and other major crimes.
As a full member of the Caribbean Financial Action Task Force, the FSRB (FATF-Style Regional Bodies) for the Caribbean region, St. Maarten not only has to follow the 40 recommendations regarding prevention and detection of money laundering and terrorism and proliferation financing, but also has to demonstrate that the particular actions taken are successful. FATF issues their recommendations according to four levels of compliance: Compliant (C), Largely Compliant (LC), Partially Compliant (PC), Non-Compliant (NC), or could, in exceptional cases, be marked as not applicable (NA). NC and PC represent the lowest ratings a country can obtain.
Concerns from 2012
In 2012 St. Maarten received ratings of PC and NC on 14 of the 16 core and key recommendations. St. Maarten was also rated partially compliant or non-compliant in 20 of the 24 non-core and non-key recommendations. Regarding compliance with the 9 special recommendations to counter terrorism financing, 4 were rated as PC and 5 as NC in St. Maarten. In 2012, evaluators found that St. Maarten had no regulatory and supervisory anti-money-laundering and counter-terrorism-financing authority for casinos and online casinos. That remains true in 2024, 12 years later.
The evaluators were extremely concerned about the lack of qualified law enforcement officials to investigate money-laundering as well as the limited and relevant investigations by the Prosecutor's Office.
In 2022, a well-known casino’s bank accounts were closed due to a change in risk profiles that did not match the bank’s risk appetite. The harsh reality is that the delays in Parliament by several factions over the years contribute to why the CFATF recommendations and regulations have not been met as yet. On the floor of Parliament PFP has sounded the alarm during the previous administration regarding these issues, to be met with silence and inaction.
What this means for St. Maarten now
Most local banks handle international financial transactions for their clients (i.e. when an individual or business wants to send funds to another country), and they need overseas correspondent banks to do this process. The FATF pressures foreign correspondent banks to employ a risk-based strategy when doing business with local banks and conduct risk assessments to see if high-risk customers/businesses will utilize them.
If the correspondent bank finds that the local bank has high-risk customers who do not comply with FATF’s recommendations or their own anti-money-laundering national laws, it will end the relationship and advise other correspondent banks not to do business with them, leaving local banks unable to process overseas transactions for clients. To avoid this, local banks impose strong anti-money-laundering compliance regulations on their clients, which can close their accounts. Correspondent banks, among others, will now be very interested to see how St. Maarten will be evaluated in September 2024. They will have in mind the hefty US $150 million penalty that the New York State Department of Financial Services (DFS) issued in July 2020, to Deutsche Bank AG.
Final Thoughts
This will not only impact clients who heavily rely on financial products on our island but regular people such as caretakers who transfer money between countries, students in school outside of the Kingdom, and the everyday St. Maartener who is considered at risk for banking. This decision also impacts our ability to easily negotiate digital payments (i.e. Paypal) and bring St. Maarten into the future with banking. Additionally, this will have a severe impact on our country’s financial, economic and investment environment and products. We all have to work together to get St. Maarten to pass through this CFATF 2024 evaluation.
Along with regulating taxation and tendering, we at PFP believe that attaining a positive compliance result from the CFATF is an important step toward ensuring financial access and opportunity for all St. Maarteners. With a voice in Parliament, I will be able to continue to champion these improvements and remind us of these approaching deadlines. As a legal professional, it is my hope to see the country raise our standards and take our place amongst our peers.
Raeyhon Peterson
