Dear Editor,
The administrative agreement signed on November 14, in Bonaire ignited a lot and sometimes strong reactions in which words were used as 'intervention', 'higher supervision' and 'soft' indication. Invariably the comparison is drawn with St. Eustatius where one does not hesitate to say the intervention on Bonaire looks different than on St. Eustatius, and the central government commissioner is compared with the still-to-be-appointed program director on Bonaire.
One is apparently of the opinion that this is indeed an intervention. Furthermore, surprise was expressed to the fact that the administrative agreement was agreed upon just 4 months before the election (March 20, 2019) and cries like 'governing beyond the grave’ were heard.
However, there is no one who has wondered what an administrative agreement in this context means. In this context, an administrative agreement is an agreement in which intentions, appointments and procedures about mutual cooperation between the central government and subnational governments are established, in which is agreed upon how the different levels of government will (financially) contribute to the desired policy.
In 2007, the national government and the association of Dutch municipalities (VNG) consent on an administrative agreement regarding different matters that touch the authority of the Dutch mayors. In 2008, the national government entered into a covenant for the period 2008-2011 with the Dutch provinces regarding the administrative and financial relationships, investment and realization of national goals and deregulating of tasks, and transfer of financial resources.
In 2011, the national government once more agreed on an administrative agreement with VNG, the Dutch provincial authorities and the association of regional water authorities. In 2015, another administrative agreement was agreed upon with such parties, but this time regarding the introduction of the environment and planning laws. With regard to the aforementioned administrative agreements, there are also conflicts observed. In 2011, it was shown that the conflict between the national government and the municipalities about the administrative agreement can be solved by an extra guarantee of 200 million euros.
The municipal authorities had claimed also more say on the reforms of the local labour market and social employment services. The feeling that the local autonomy is affected is therefore not a strange phenomenon when closing administrative agreements. But according to information regarding the aforementioned conflict, the national government invited the association to put forward proposals and the matter was settled by mutual agreement.
Municipalities commit themselves by means of an administrative agreement to the achievement of certain targets and getting rid of backlogs. To this end, the responsibility lies primarily with the municipality and in the second place, in this regard Bonaire with the ministry of internal affairs. The national government and municipals emphatically expressed in an agreement that in good collaboration they will cope with the challenges. If in the end the municipalities, despite the above-mentioned possibilities are still lagging in tasks, the ‘ultimum remedium’ has to be applied in the form of higher supervision.
The administrative agreement between the public entity of Bonaire and the national government is exactly tailored on the same model. If it appears that backlogs by conscious opposition within a certain period are not eliminated, only then can the ‘ultimum remedium’ be applied in the form of an intervention and direct supervision.
It should also be said that an intervention à la St. Eustatius is completely out of the question. Even the way of governing the last four years on Bonaire had not given any reason to intervene. According to the escalation ladder, Bonaire still stands at phase 1, wherein the idea is still very much alive that one can come to a successful joint solution.
After years of haggling, it seems that the national government and the public entity of Bonaire cautiously surrounded themselves with the ambition to stand as one government. A government that puts the citizens at the centre of all its policies and activities. A government that no longer wishes to patronize, but gives space to the people, companies and organizations. Society benefits from a government system in which responsibilities and tasks are properly invested and goals and results are clearly formulated.
In anticipation of these new developments, I therefore already have recommended in my thesis to focus on the proper management of public affairs and to grow a culture of responsibility to conscientiously implement tasks and responsibilities of the representatives of the people and commissioners in the public administration.
It seems that a cautious beginning has been made.
Dr. Willem a. Cecilia
Bonaire
Dear Editor,
I was called by a female person who I believe could know and told that she had read my letter to you in which I expressed my displeasure with those Members of Parliament who voted against the “Safe school plan”. She further said that there was nothing wrong with the “safe school plan,” it had to be done that way in connection with the upcoming evident toppling of the present government. And then she reminded me of that hot disputed lunch of a few months ago in which I suggested to a certain member of parliament to keep quiet, because what will he tell the people if the rumors turn out to be true.
She further told me that the position of the Justice minister is the hold-up, because it would be too blatant if a Prime Minister from the fallen government accept a ministerial position in the new to-be-formed government.
I knew and still know that a Heyliger-Williams marriage could never last. Once ago it used to be that “the schoolchildren say,” but since they start texting everything is black on white and everything goes viral.
But I am about to be vindicated because for a while now I have been advocating “out with the old and in with the young”. They did not get rid of the old. Is not it said that you can’t teach old dogs new tricks, so the old dogs are up to their old tricks again.
As long as we do not learn how to quarrel with each other and not let outsiders know what we are quarreling about, there will be no unity.
To avoid a Marlin III we have to get rid of the old and bring in the young.
The old does say, “You know what you got, but you ain’ know what you goin’ get,” but I say, “Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.” Fool me seven times, shame on who?
I really would have liked to see what Minister Smith would have done with education, but unfortunately this is not in the cards.
I would appreciate this letter to be printed, because I am ready to accept the backlash if nothing happens, but I would feel worse if I am aware of the possibility of St. Maarten being dealt another devastating blow, did not mention anything, and it happened.
Let’s hope I am wrong.
Russell A. Simmons
The United Bus Drivers Association met with Middle Region board and the meeting was very fruitful.
Although Middle Region people hope these bus drivers are not just using their road for the sake of the Dutch Quarter sewage project.
The members of United Bus Drivers Association are saying Middle Region people can now start traveling on the buses that are now passing through Middle Region.
The United Bus Drivers Association also still keeps promising they are willing to get smaller buses to run through Middle Region and Sucker Garden.
The entire population of St. Maarten keep saying buses don’t run on the east side of the island, like there is no government for east.
There’s a call for Middle Region people to be peaceful and humble.
Let’s give the United Bus Drivers Association, transport minister, prime minister and cabinet to provide buses for the people continuously and for ever.
(I quote, “Let’s see how positive our Transport Minister will be.)
Cuthbert Bannis
Dear Editor,
The streetlights going up on Guana Bay Road are on all day long. The
lights going down towards the beach are out all day and all night since
Irma.
Please, GEBE, come and fix them before Christmas.
Thank you and happy holidays.
Christine Bergamasco
Dear Editor,
In the recent article about salvaging vessels (and thereby clearing channels) why is there no mention of how the "rule" came to life, and by whose hand? Also, the implication that only one salvage operator was permitted to do work does not pass the smell test.
Who benefited? Certainly not the residents of SXM!
Aldis Porieti
