Dear Editor,
Imagine if a natural disaster like a hurricane occurs and you can fix all the damage in one day. That would mean that the entire cost of the damage would be limited to the repair of the damage plus the losses incurred on that one day.
On the other hand, if the country closes down for a year the country would suffer losses due to the fact that revenues both public and private would stop and there would be a need for someone to cover the cost. not only of the hurricane damage but also the cost of being closed for a year. There would also be the added cost of further weather damage to vulnerable assets.
Now imagine you are the decision maker of a donor country and you would like to support the rebuilding of an associated state in the Caribbean and you decide to donate US $525 million.
It seems obvious that to provide the most value for your donation. the faster you get these funds injected into the economy. the less the losses through closure would be.
Let us imagine that you are reluctant to execute the funds donation through government distribution because you have reason to believe that the funds will not reach their intended goals and be misspent. Let’s use the broad term “leakage” to describe the percentage of funds that would not reach their intended and effective destination.
The ultimate question for this planning challenge is to know the relationship between the total value of the “leakage” compared to the cost of a delay of the injection into the economy of the funds. It seems reasonable to expect that the donor country has considered this matter and used it as a factor in its determination of policy.
It is unquestionably true that donor countries know that a degree of “leakage” is inevitable in the same manner that an administrative cost is to be expected.
If this example were to be that of St. Maarten and the Netherlands. the kingdom partners. this discussion should be able to be honestly carried on. And this discussion must be on the basis of the best hard data available. This data can only come from St. Maarten which collects and manages the data on economic activity in St. Maarten and from the finance ministry which provides figures on public sector revenues.
This is why I am calling on the Ministries of TEATT [Tourism, Economic Affairs, Transport and Telecommunication – Ed.] and Finance in St. Maarten to provide usable data that can show how the losses through delay compare to the “leakage” so that we can all judge the quality of the decisions made on the basis of the best evidence.
We then should have a good discussion with our kingdom partners in the context of the mutual support on the best planning for natural disaster damage minimalization.
Would anybody deny that this would be a useful and productive discussion for all parties?
Robbie Ferron
Dear Editor,
Published in early January and reportedly scheduled to appear in an English translation before the end of this year, Sérotonine (Michel Houellebecq et Flammarion, 2019) is steeped in regret and remorse. It is drenched in melancholy and nostalgia; in a longing for a past that existed when French sovereignty prevailed: before NATO; before liberalism, the ’60s and the sexual revolution; before the EU and its euro, and the fracturing of Western society – that of France in particular.
Serotonin is the neurotransmitter, the chemical found in our body that contributes to our feeling well, to our being happy; antidepressants are the medications most commonly used to help relieve the distress of depression or anxiety.
In the prologue to his majestic book The Gene: An Intimate History (Scribner, 2016), Siddhartha Mukhergee quotes Philip Larkin’s “This Be The Verse”:
“They [mess] you up, your mum and dad.
“They may not mean to, but they do.
“They fill you with the faults they had
“And add some extra, just for you.”
My apologies to P. Larkin (1922-1985), one of Britain’s “best-loved poets”, and to Professor Mukhergee who quotes the poet textually, for, above, I have substituted the second four-letter word in Larkin’s famous poem with a four-letter word of my own choosing.
François-Michel Thomas was born in La Réunion, one of the two French “Départments” in the Indian Ocean. In the carefree ’60s, when he was five or six years old, his parents placed him in the care of his paternal grandmother (in France) and they went off to live their lives. Michel chose his grandmother’s maiden last name (Houellebecq) as a pen name when he started writing.
The author had a rather difficult relationship with his mother (Lucie Ceccaldi), a Communist and social activist; a strong-willed woman who, in spite of her self-professed maternal shortcomings, lived an exemplary professional life as a caregiver. She was an esteemed medical doctor who attended to the less fortunate folks of her community in La Réunion. Mother and son had a violent dispute when she visited him in Paris in 1991. That was the last time they spoke.
In 2008, aged 83, Lucie Ceccaldi returned to France for the release of her autobiography, L’Innocente (The Innocent), in which she reproaches her son for having misrepresented her in one of his books. She reportedly tried in vain to contact him then. She died two years later in 2010 in La Réunion. Time did not bring them back together again; there was no reunion on La Réunion. There was, reportedly, no reconciliation.
Some readers draw a solid red line between authors and their protagonists as if characters were completely independent of their creators; at another extreme others allow little or no distinction between them. Houellebecq excels in confounding all such readers: his characters, his protagonists, in particular, are so much like and so different from their creator.
The narrator in Sérotonine (Florent-Claude) is a 46-year-old agronomist addicted to nicotine, alcohol and antidepressants. He is also obsessed with his eroticism or lack of and he is an expert on the history and effects of antidepressants. “Captorix”, the new (fictive) antidepressant he uses, is judged to be much better than the old ones, but it is rendering him impotent. He muses regretfully on his past relationships with women and he pays an important visit to an old friend he has not seen in 20 years.
Florent-Claude explains that “God had disposed of him,” but that he has never been but an inconsistent weakling. He blames no one but himself. He adds that his parents had done their best to give him the arms necessary in his life’s struggles, but that he has never been able to take charge of his own life; that it seems very likely that, like the first part, the second part of his life would be nothing but a painful breakdown (P. 10-34).
There are pearls of poetry, irony and wisdom in the otherwise raunchy telling of this depressive narrator. He is often caustic and downright provocative in his assessment of people and places: “The English is almost as racist as the Japanese. … Holland is not a country. How can a Dutchman be xenophobic? There is a contradiction in the terms. Holland is not a country; at best it is an enterprise” (P. 34).
Like all journeys, Houellebecq’s novel has its end; the narrator has decided that the life that awaits him is not worth living, and so he plans his exit meticulously: he will let himself fall to his death from the apartment he purchased when he had to leave his hotel due to new non-smoking ordinances.
Florent-Claude ends his narrative with the following observations: “God really looks over us, He thinks of us all the time and sometimes He gives us directives that are very precise. These impulses of love that flow into our chests to the point of rendering us breathless, these illuminations, these ecstasies, inexplicable considering our biological nature, our state of simple primates, are signs that are extremely clear.
“And today I understand the point of view of Christ, his repeated annoyances faced with the hardening of hearts: they have all the signs and they don’t consider them. Must I truly give my life for such wretched souls? Must I be that explicit? It seems I must.” (P. 347).
If to regret is to blame oneself for choices relating to one’s personal decision-making resulting in action or inaction; if remorse is an even deeper feeling of sorrow and self-reproach, an even more distressing emotion; and if redemption is rescue and recovery, atoning for a fault, an action, a judgment that was wrong, misguided or unjust, Houellebecq’s Sérotonine is a resounding “mea culpa” and a cry for redemption in a world that is desperately lacking in kindness and solidarity.
Gérard M. Hunt
Dear Editor,
Majority of people in St. Maarten, St. Martin and the entire Caribbean nations wish Theo a speedy healing and recovery.
Dear Editor,
I have taken note of the announcement by the usurping puppet Government installed by the Dutch colonizer on St. Eustatius, that it has signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the Dutch company Woonlinie and the Ministry of Interior Affairs and Kingdom Relations (BZK) to start a pilot project to renovate one existing home and build two new homes in Golden Rock.
The Woonlinie deal is yet another example of plans prepared by the democratically elected and legitimate Government of St. Eustatius for the benefit of the people of St. Eustatius being hijacked and changed to suit the agenda of the Dutch colonizers and their friends in the Netherlands. It is also another clear attempt at slowly but surely taking over and selling out the patrimony of the people of St. Eustatius, all under the guise of helping them, and reorganizing and improving the functioning of local organizations.
The plan presented by Mr. Franco ignores the decision of the Island Council which was taken in the latter part of 2017 to sell 35 of the total amount of homes in Golden Rock to the current tenants as a first phase. This decision was applauded even by the Chairman of the Island Council, Mr. Julian C.A. Woodley, at the time.
Some of the tenants in Golden Rock have been living in the homes for over 40 years, and the homes will be offered to them at affordable prices ranging from US $5,000 to US $25,000 each. By also constructing additional homes in addition to selling the current ones, the Island Council aims to increase affordable local home ownership.
Unfortunately, before this took place, the Dutch colonizer unlawfully took over the Government, and appointed its colonial representatives Mr. Franco and Mr. Stegers to take over the SHF [Statia Housing Foundation – Ed.], just as it took over the local Government.
During 2016 and 2017, the sale of the 35 homes was deliberately boycotted by the former colonial representative in Bonaire, who repeatedly held back the appointment of numerous nominated qualified Board members of the SHF for months without a valid reason.
The Dutch Government is well-known for its outright refusal towards its own Houses of Parliament to structurally raise the social and other benefits for people on the BES islands [Bonaire, St. Eustatius and Saba]. One therefore has to really wonder why a large company like Woonlinie and the Dutch Government have been so interested in executing this project on St. Eustatius since 2011, and what the underlying strategy is. Certainly, it is not out of charity or love for the people of St. Eustatius.
Based on the vague and limited plans and stringent conditions of yearly increasing rent presented so proudly by Mr. Franco, as well as the experiences with Woonlinie on Saba, the residents of St. Eustatius who are in dire need of affordable housing and wish to own their own homes will not benefit from this new development at all. It will only continue to keep them dependent in their own country by a foreign Government’s deals with foreign companies.
I can recall that, upon leaving office in July of 2013, former Commissioner Koos Sneek proudly proclaimed to have “saved the plans for constructing social housing in cooperation with Woonlinie from extinction”. What Mr. Sneek still hasn’t explained to the general public though, including those in need of social housing, is why he signed a deal with the SHF as owner Director of Norako, soon after becoming Commissioner of Finance.
Mr. Sneek also hasn’t explained yet why he had a lien placed on the accounts of the SHF when they could not live up to the agreement he tricked them into, which sweetheart deal was struck between Norako and the SHF after the current puppet Government took over and the court case of the SHF against Norako was settled out of court, and who signed off on that deal.
I hereby wish to again remind Mr. Franco that he and others who represent the colonial Government will be legally held accountable for any and all acts committed by them which are in violation of the UN-mandated right of St. Eustatius and its people to a full measure of self-government.
This includes acts aimed at selling out the patrimony of the people of St. Eustatius, and unlawfully interfering with the functioning of the local legitimate Government and organizations like the SHF.
Additionally, looking at the shameful track record of the Dutch Government in the Netherlands when it comes to the management of the Tax Department and the Ministry of Justice and Safety, the damage to the houses in Groningen, and the debacle surrounding the renovation of the house of Parliament, just to name few, the Dutch Government has no moral authority either to tell the people of St. Eustatius how to run their affairs.
How can they pretend to improve the running of St. Eustatius when they can’t properly manage their own affairs?
In closing, I strongly urge Mr. Franco to uphold, respect, and carry out the decision of the legitimately and democratically elected Island Council regarding the selling of the homes in Golden Rock.
Clyde I. van Putten
Leader, Progressive Labour Party, St. Eustatius
Dear Editor,
I spent two weeks in St. Maarten/St. Martin in the end of February and wrote a travel story for the Austrian daily newspaper KURIER. I also read articles in your newspaper there, that you need tourists. Well, before, during and after this trip I doubted that you want any (European?) tourists. Despite the extremely high prices for hotel rooms (prices for which I get luxury rooms at luxury destinations worldwide) there is no service, but only cheating and lying. There is also no interest of your tourism boards to help journalists with information or anything else – I mean, I bring you tourists! None of them answered my questions before and after the trip.
I know that you had a terrible hurricane. And that there are construction sites. But some hotels do not tell it on their homepage. And some are just cheating. I send you my private report of three hotels in the attachment. My first hotel, which is not mentioned in the report, was ok, good beach, good restaurant, but very bad service and overpriced like everywhere on the island.
Wolfgang Godai
A very disappointed journalist
Austria
