Dear Editor,
My test for evaluating candidates for the upcoming election is to question them on how easy it is to make things better on Sint Maarten .If they claim it is easy then they drop on my ratings .
Much of the conversation about our political future seems to be based on the assumption that leaders in the past have been “bad,” and if “good” people were to be elected all would be well. It seems to me that whether or not the people are “good” or “bad” they also have to have a full understanding of the tasks and how government works. My guess is that a very small percentage of the very many candidates have that understanding of matters that would be sufficient to help extract us from our difficult circumstances.
The clear reality is that we are in a difficult position in Sint Maarten. Even before the hurricane competitive destinations were increasingly putting pressure on us. Our relatively sophisticated organizations (by Caribbean standards) were not functioning, our taxation structure was impacting our growth and our costs of operating both public and private were becoming excessive.
The hurricane made that all worse, and the manner in which the hurricane crisis was managed made it all much worse.
Any candidate that makes huge promises (e.g. lower food prices, reduce rents, fix the dump in six months) without already having a well-thought, previously-documented vision that is documented should not be considered.
I would look for candidates that show deep understanding of problems. Who will not shy away from the difficulties, both in the political discussion or in their planned policy execution.
I would look for candidates that have proven their ability to manage, and at the very least show evidence that they understand the challenges of management. They should have a clear understanding of the executive branch as distinct from legislative roles. And they should not be “constitutionalists” which are those persons who hide behind complex legislation to justify them taking no action.
Their age is, of course, entirely irrelevant.
We need to end up in our parliament with the sort of parliamentarians that make successful modern democracies function well. They should be specialists in an area which is agreed by their party to be their area of focus. They should become highly informed in that area and be able to support a vision as well as supervise (through parliament) the executing ministry.
With a 15-person parliament their area of specialty may be wider than in larger jurisdictions but in the case of Sint Maarten there are a number of focus areas that lend themselves to prioritization like tax reform, waste management, health care pricing and investment and law enforcement. On one of these subjects at least, they should have an in-depth understanding of the options open to Sint Maarten and the challenges of executing on Sint Maarten.

Robbie Ferron

Dear Editor,

Normally I give information and explanation to the people of St. Maarten. But presently I have a question for St. Maarten legal advisors about article 41 of the St. Maarten Constitution. See paragraph 3.

It states: "I swear (promise) allegiance to the King and the Constitution of the Kingdom, that I shall always help to uphold the Constitution of Sint Maarten, and that I shall champion the interests of Sint Maarten to the best of my ability. So help me, Almighty God! (And I hereby make this declaration and promise)!"

My question is, if the ministers’ allegiance is to the King and the Constitution of the Kingdom, what happens when the interest of St. Maarten is in conflict with the Kingdom’s wishes? Common sense tells me you cannot serve 2 masters. Allegiance is loyalty or commitment of a subordinate to a superior or of an individual to a group or cause. If the St. Maarten ministers are answerable to St. Maarten parliament, but the allegiance is to the King and the kingdom Constitution, what happens if the Kingdom disagrees with a law St. Maarten parliament has established?

Should the kingdom government supersede St. Maarten parliament? Should the ministers and Governor be obliged to then disobey the request of the people of St. Maarten (St. Maarten parliament)?

We all know the kingdom government is the highest body in the Dutch kingdom. But who should the Council of Ministers of St. Maarten be loyal to? Should it be to the allegiance of the King and Constitution of the Kingdom or to the people of St. Maarten (St. Maarten parliament)? Your legal input will be highly be appreciated.

The patriot Miguel Arrindell

Dear Editor,

As the campaign moves along more and more, I see the momentum leaning in the direction of young politicians. History would tell me that this is good. New blood and more diverse ideas coming together is what we desperately need in Sint Maarten. It goes without saying that those older politicians with a track record of throwing down all those previous governments, will continue to do the same, and their cronies will continue to plead for them to come back.

I will not dare call Cuthbert Banis a crony, but he definitely put himself in a strange light with me when he puts black on white asking for eleven seats for the UD. After seeing which politicians ended up where after every toppling of government, and realizing that the DP party was never left out of any of those governments, I do not think it is naiveté which makes a man want to put a combination of UP and DP in office again. And outright, mind you.

I do not think he would ask for that and no one would react. Like I stated on occasions the young people are constantly surprising me these days with knowledge of important matters concerning the country. Many of them also realize they are systematically being kept down by those in government who consider them a threat. One of them asked me if I think it is right to eventually appoint Sarah Wescot to the Advisory Council after Wescot considered giving advice to the Prime Minister “degrading"?

Give that a thought. It is degrading for members of Parliament to offer advice to a Minister. So I have to continue stressing on the people of Sint Maarten to get rid of the old, who by now we all know are instrumental in never making an effort to abolish that infamous dreaded "six-month contract”.

I continue to notice that the Christian Party is making all effort to do things the correct way. Which is totally contrary to those members of government who cannot show anything they have done feasible to the people. It seems monotonous, but that is what it is. Total disregard for the people and the proof is in the last toppling of government. They cannot promise dignified government because they have proven not to be interested in the well-being of the people.

And are trying their utmost not to have anything with integrity. Integrity is a behaviour advocated in the Scriptures. A behaviour which even atheists respect. All the more reason for the cry "Out with the old and in with the new".

Russell A. Simmons

Dear Editor,

When your house is on fire you do not fight about who is to blame or how the fire may have started. Before you do anything else, you try to minimize the damage and then you try to extinguish the fire.

Burning houses. That seems the best way to describe the current situation on Sint Eustatius (Statia) and Sint Maarten: Caribbean parts of our Kingdom. The Statian government has been sent home by Secretary of State Knops. According to the Dutch government, this is due to an administrative culture best characterized as lawless, and severe financial mismanagement. Politicians on sister island Sint Maarten are similarly accused of corruption and bribery by the Mafia, not only by other politicians, but also by their own electorate.

A well-known example is that of the Italian chief of gambling Francesco Corallo, who is accused of maintaining close ties with Theo Heyliger, one of Sint Maarten’s political leaders. At their turn, these and other local politicians accuse The Hague of neo-colonial intentions. The house is on fire. Poverty and unemployment on Statia and Sint Maarten are increasing, while those in charge on both sides of the ocean are fighting about who is to blame. They conveniently forget what their task is: making sure that all Dutch citizens can lead a decent and dignified existence. For good order: citizens of these islands are also citizens of the Dutch Kingdom.

What makes the situation even more horrifying is the literal fire that is burning on the dump at the centre of Sint Maarten. Schools and corporations have had to shut down while local residents have to keep their doors and windows closed. A dark cloud is covering the sunny island. And again people are discussing who is responsible: who or what caused the fire? Was it done intentionally? But as we already indicated, the fire needs to be extinguished before this discussion can take place.

This fire can only be doused when representatives from different departments (the departments of Environment, Public Health, Infrastructure, and Finances) from Curaçao, Sint Maarten, Aruba and the Netherlands, work together. Such a Kingdom-wide, management group, based on equity and solidarity, should also include experts from the corporate and the academic worlds.

The management group is tasked with wisely spending the money that has been made available for the reconstruction of Sint Maarten in public-private partnerships. This sustainable development will transform Sint Maarten into an environment-friendly and financially profitable tourist island.

But this plan does not only concern Sint Maarten. This cooperation should lay the foundation for a Dutch Caribbean that takes the lead in social, ecological and economic development, both regionally and internationally. Under the guidance of the Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management, the Netherlands has become renowned for its abilities to adjust landscapes to the force of water and to protect her people. Their knowledge and expertise should now be made available to also make the Caribbean infrastructure resistant to the destructive forces of hurricanes and earthquakes.

A similar approach shall extinguish the figural fire that is burning on Statia. Professionals and politicians of the BES-islands, Aruba, Curaçao, Sint Maarten and the Netherlands should be selected to collectively fight poverty and develop a well-functioning daily administration. Experts from the island itself should play a prominent role in this. Selection and strategy development lie with the Kingdom Government: The Dutch Cabinet complemented with the plenipotentiaries from Aruba, Curaçao and Sint Maarten.

This Kingdom Government is accountable to a Kingdom Parliament that is in dire need of being established. It will emanate from the Inter-Parliamentary Kingdom Consultation (IPKO), through which Caribbean and Dutch parliamentarians now meet each other twice a year. This is not nearly often enough. Moreover, the Kingdom Government is currently not accountable to the IPKO which leaves this institution rather powerless. By collectively extinguishing the fires on both Sint Eustatius and Sint Maarten, we can finally give shape to an equal and democratic Kingdom.

Dr. Francio Guadeloupe (University of Amsterdam).

Jordi Halfman (University of Amsterdam)

Nicole Sanches (University of Utrecht)

Co-signed by:

Prof. Dr. Monique Volman (University of Amsterdam)

Dr. Yvon van der Pijl (University of Utrecht)

Dr. Guiselle Starink-Martha (University of Amsterdam)

Sanne Rotmeijer (KITLV, Leiden)

Lisenne Delgado LLM (University of Curacao)

Oldine Bryson (former head of the SER, Sint Maarten)

Benjamin Ortega (head of the St. Maarten Development Movement)