Dear Editor,
A positive and improved view of the future is a key ingredient for the perceptions of a people collaborating to create a great future. A positive view of the future will drive productivity, investment and political collaboration. Excessive expectations increase conflict.
In Sint Maarten in the 1960s and prior there had not been much in the way of great prospects in Sint Maarten. There was little reason for the quality of life to improve and therefore also no high expectations. Then in the 1970s and 1980s the particular circumstances with a growth in air travel, the smart use of opportunities by Claude Wathey and investment interest in the eastern US led to a boom in Sint Maarten. Not having had this boom before, the population adopted the expectation that this economic boom would result in a great standard of living for all in Sint Maarten. The levels of expectation bloomed from a low level to a high one.
And whilst some prospered, the need for workers and the relatively open border meant that the wealth needed to be shared with a much larger population so the expectations, inevitably inflated, were not fully realized. The access to internet and cable TV, like the rest of the world also accelerated this spurt in expectations.
In the last few years, especially since 10-10-10, the country has hit a number of challenges which have made it clear that prosperity and happiness are going to require overcoming some fundamental hurdles and the resolution of some tough structural impediments. Not just instable government but dump fires, indictments for corruption, ineffective civil service, crime and of course hurricanes.
This reduction of the expectations has led to a wide range of responses:
* Calls for increased nationalism. The setbacks have led to some believing that a more “unified” country would solve the problems and return the country to be on track for the expectations developed in the 1970s and 1980s. Nationalistic pride is seen as the solution to raising the ability of the country to produce the unrealized benefits that had been expected. Flagpoles got built and efforts made that were intended to “bring the people together.”
* Identification of “culprits” that can be seen as the cause of the non-realization of expectations. These vary, but include “the Dutch,” the political establishment, the older members of the political establishment, the younger and newer members of the political establishment, investors, employers and (up to 2010) Curaçao.
* Increased interest in radical solutions like Independence on the one side and integration into the Netherlands on the other side. Between these extremes there are a range of ideas that seem largely driven by the desperate hope that the expectations can return.
On top of these declining expectations there comes a disastrous hurricane exceeding in damage all that came before. The vulnerability of a small single-pillar economy, the limitations of a small state as well as the thought that somehow the shameful looting will be punished in some form, are also added to the mix that negatively impacts the positive views of the people of Sint Maarten and their expectations.
“Resilient” and “Strong” are good choices of words to describe what the country would now like to be. But nobody is attracted to the concept of being resilient, it is more a condition that you are forced to be in tough circumstances. These tough circumstances, however, also reduce the level of expectations and thereby allow for more measured decision-making, a more grounded view of immediate prospects and rethinking of some unrealistic expectations that evolved from the boom times and political restructuring and might have been a contributing factor to the many of the challenges like political instability.
This more realistic perception of the future might be the silver lining of Irma.

Robbie Ferron

Dear Editor,

“No, Ronald, you never get used to it.” That is what Roy Marlin, an important politician in St. Maarten who recently passed away, said when I visited the island for the first time. I asked him how it could happen that politicians from St. Maarten and the Netherlands get along so badly with each other. He said that it didn’t help that Dutch people are so direct.

I found that remarkable, because our countries have been together for centuries. Shouldn’t we be used to each other after so many years? According to Marlin, that wasn’t the case. Criticism and harsh words, though very common in the Netherlands, in Sint Maarten one would never get used to it.

Roy Marlin recently passed away and with his death the Kingdom lost a good and wise man. Still, I will never stop criticising. I will also do so next week, when parliamentarians from St. Maarten, Aruba, Curaçao and the Netherlands come together in the House of Representatives to discuss the problems in the Kingdom, in the setting of the so-called IPKO.

A sensitive topic is corruption. I wonder how I should discuss this next week, with parliamentarian Chanel Brownbill, who has been sentenced to a prison sentence for tax fraud, or with Frans Richardson, who is suspected of fraud and buying votes. Or with Theo Heyliger, the leader of the largest party in St. Maarten, who is suspected of contacts with Mafia boss Francesco Corallo, who previously bribed Prime Minister Gerrit Schotte on Curaçao – Schotte also received a prison sentence, but is still in parliament.

The St. Maarten parliament only has 15 members, but the list of suspects is much longer. Franklin Meyers wanted to be Prime Minister, but did not get through the screening, probably because of ties with gambling boss Corallo. Rolando Brison faced problems with embezzling, while Christophe Emmanuel committed fraud with issuing of land.

I know, it sounds hard and direct, but I don’t know another way to put it. The list is not even complete yet. The counter-argument is that there are also politicians in the Netherlands who are suspected of fraud and corruption. But those people are usually forced to resign by their own party. On St. Maarten, these people remain in parliament. Even if politicians are convicted, they often return to the electoral list of a party, like Maria Buncamper, who has been convicted of tax fraud, or Silvio Matser, who has been convicted of election fraud.

A few years ago, I asked a Member of Parliament from St. Maarten, Patrick Illidge, who was suspected of being bribed by a brothel owner, to leave the IPKO meeting about integrity. I understand that most politicians who have been suspected of a crime won’t come to the Netherlands now, but how can we ever have a serious debate about integrity?

Soon the hurricane season begins for St. Maarten and the island’s population lives in fear. Last year, Hurricane Irma destroyed the island and there’s still much damage that needs to be repaired. The Netherlands gave emergency aid and the population of our country raised money. In addition, the Dutch government cleared 550 million euros for reconstruction. It is not easy to explain to Dutch citizens why we invest so much money in St. Maarten, certainly not if we keep receiving reports about corruption. It also doesn’t help if members of the St. Maarten government complain that the help we give is not enough and brutally blame the Netherlands for their own failures.

Recently, the Law Enforcement Council released a devastating report in which the actions of the St. Maarten government during last year's disaster were addressed. “The Country St. Maarten has demonstrated that it was completely unprepared for a disaster of this calibre,” it was concluded. The Council and many others found that “the consequences for the legal order, the wellbeing of the people and the damage to the economy were many times greater than if the necessary preparations and (timely) decisions had taken place.”

The people on St. Maarten need homes, jobs and roads after the devastating hurricane. But the population of the island also needs politicians who are honest about their own failure.

I know, I am very direct: but how is this possible if half of the parliament is suspected of fraud and corruption?

Ronald van Raak

Member of the Second Chamber of the Dutch Parliament for the Socialist Party (SP)

Dear Editor

I would like to react to the letter to the editor in the Monday issue of this newspaper by Mrs. L. Gumbs-Duggins. The fact that state-secretary Raymond Knops during one of his recent visits purchased groceries in her supermarket, which action went viral on Facebook, has prompted a reaction from this well known local supermarket owner.

I believe it is unfortunate that she feels singled out and in her own words has to defend her company against biased characterization. The way I see it, the action of the state-secretary was not intended to single out and expose any particular supermarket. The intention was to confirm the high prices of groceries on Statia and not those of a Duggins supermarket.

Personally, I am happy that for this Knops had chosen one of the few local stores. In my limited shopping experience I have noticed that this particular supermarket in many instances is offering lower prices than many other supermarkets on the island. Also, unlike many others, Duggins supermarket never has a deaf ear when social organizations request its support with their fundraising and other activities.

The fact that Knops still finds the prices very high on Statia is an indication and a clear sign on the wall that something needs to be done to the purchasing power of the people of Statia. Mrs. Gumbs’ call for the establishment of the social minimum as soon as possible I therefore fully support.

I also agree with her reference to the study into the prices on our island where it is concluded that the margin of the supermarket is a mere 3 per cent. This clearly means that the high prices of groceries are not caused by the profit margin that the stores on Statia are charging, but by external factors like production cost, margins of outside wholesalers, high transportation cost and taxes and harbor fees charged by our governments as well as by the still levied turnover taxes on goods exported to Statia by St. Maarten.

The action by the state-secretary is a clear sign that the present coalition government is recognizing the fact that something needs to be done and at the same time a signal to parliament to be ready to deal with the long-awaited and overdue social minimum for the Caribbean Netherlands. It is time to take the observations in the Spies report and other researches seriously. The call for higher social allowances in parliament by the CDA and D66 parties shows that the message is reaching home. And I agree with Mrs. Gumbs, “it is better to do well than to say well”!

Koos Sneek

Democratic Party St. Eustatius

Dear Editor,

During the last election campaign I constantly advocated out with the old and in with the new. History shows who are the old, so I do not have to specify who they are.

But what I know is that many many years now I have been saying that there is nothing wrong with copying the good thing. Tourism did not start on Sint Maarten, so we have copied that from somewhere.

In the paper of May 24, I read an article on the front page which made me sad. Sad because it is totally the fault of government whose members have been there for many many years and have done nothing. The article stated by and large provided evidence shows that there are insufficient skilled laborers on the local labor market to meet the demand for skills in several industries. This is something that I wrote to you about in March of this year under the heading “There have never been professionals here.” This is sad.

Over the years I have had all kinds of conversations with members of government who instead of putting these ideas in the back of their heads for the future, tried to explain why it could not be done. One of those conversations was sending our youth to the Bushiri Hotel on Aruba which is a hotel training school. I will challenge any one of them to show me if they have made use of the Bushiri Hotel.

In 1995 we had a similar experience as with Irma and a whole lot of people who worked in the casinos found out that they were good tradesmen.

What did we do with Milton Peters College?

Do we really feel at home to rest on our laurels, knowing that we live in the hurricane belt and eventually will need skilled tradesmen? Instead of letting the people know what is going to happen to avoid this kind of predicament we are again dedicating our time in the paper to justify why we will have to continue importing cheap labour.

There are several programs in place that offer a combination of job-training and paid employment. Job-seekers have the opportunity to learn new skills and join new trades. The NIPA and White and Yellow Cross have also sent several persons to Trinidad for training Because of the urgency can I think that they are the first available ones? Are we going to continue sending our youth to Trinidad in the future? Are we going to enhance what is happening at the Vocational School and Milton Peters College?

My question is also what is more expensive? To educate your people and have them on hand, or create a bigger immigration problem which, as we know, is not conducive to the face of the island.

When I hear the amount of fights with knives and cutting in faces, which I never heard of in the past, I ask myself, what happened to The Friendly Island? What will my legacy be? I made it by not educating my people.

Does what happened with the traffic on Wednesday on the Cole Bay Hill remind us that we have too many cars on the roads and that part of the solution is to regulate public transportation in order to minimize this?

Russell A. Simmons