Dear Editor,
Have you ever heard of the “Caribbean Friendly Skies,” an airlift concept where all the flight connections are fast, the schedules are efficient, the flight attendants are beautiful, the pilots are good-looking, the assistance of the ground staff is above average, the fares are affordable, and the flying convenience is superlative? This concept is a secret tip in air transportation. So secret that very few people envisioned that it could even exist in the Caribbean. It is a beyond-average program that creates a new image for air transportation in the region.
The “Caribbean Friendly Skies” prioritizes achieving the benefits of having better service, efficiency, and affordability. If governments are interested in growth and development through increased travel and trade, they would be well advised to cooperate and support such a concept. If they don’t, well, then they are showing that they are not an appealing destination and should just step aside. Nothing should delay or hinder “Caribbean Friendly Skies.” The “Caribbean Friendly Skies” concept puts the perspectives and interests of the end-users first. For instance, the tourists who are fueling the economy revenues for 50-85 per cent. Any authority that is a hurdle in economic development may not be serving its community in an intelligent manner.
Wait a minute? What is wrong an “Open Skies” concept? “Open Skies” is a great catchy name for a hot-air-balloon festival. But it should be avoided when dealing with government authorities and politicians in the Caribbean because it immediately activates defense mechanisms as it comes across as “Eliminating regulations and government interference,” and gives the false impression of “Everyone can do whatever he wants.”
Open Skies agreements are bilateral air service agreements negotiated between countries. It involves passenger AND cargo services. All sides of the agreement need to commit to opening their respective markets. Each side’s own objectives and market characteristics may delay or cancel liberalization, because national political and economic priorities are the main determinant and also the main deterrent. The governments of 20+ Caribbean territories and multiple authorities may be involved. Quite a number! No wonder that “Open Skies” has been suggested and talked about over an extensive period of time. It was never realized. Zippo open skies is where we stand right now, and another summit of Honorables is not going to change it.
What are the differences that one is dealing with? “Friendly Skies” aims to facilitate the joyful flying experience of passengers. “Open Skies” aims to facilitate a free-market environment for air transport operations. Government agencies aim to stay in control.
There is another element that needs to be mentioned: some government-owned airlines are worried and are looking for protection. If they would provide impeccable air transportation service, they would not have to worry in the first place.
In order to find a solution, one would have to play Three-Dimensional Chess. This expression is used colloquially to describe complex, dynamic systems with many competing entities and interests, including politics, diplomacy and warfare. To describe an individual as “playing three-dimensional chess” implies a higher-order understanding and mastery of the system beyond the comprehension of their peers or ordinary observers. Finding a person who will be heading the efforts may be a challenge for itself.
How to speed up the process and get the “Caribbean Friendly Skies” concept moving? Incentives! How about awarding those countries and airlines that pledge and adhere to the concept an annually issued Certificate and Seal of Approval? The tourism authorities can use it in their destination marketing. The countries that do not subscribe to the concept will go empty-handed. For travel agents abroad, it suggests that it may be better to ignore destinations that don’t show the Seal of Approval. For vacationers, it is a sign that they are not particularly welcome or that the destination is not friendly enough. Some airlines may be avoiding those territories. The countries that are not willing to cooperate are simply wasting their money on destination promotion.
The negotiations for a “Caribbean Friendly Skies” concept will concern only passenger services and not cargo. Just one example here. The transit passenger from abroad should be protected from filling out forms for entering a transit hub-airport and then when flying from hub to end-destination again new forms that need to be filled out. Many forms are ending up in shoe cartons anyway, regardless of the claim that they are used for statistics. Many territories in the region make themselves ridiculous to travelers by clinging to control by paperwork. For vacationers and other passengers, it is a nuisance.
There must be better ways. That is what the “Caribbean Friendly Skies” shall be about. Skip bureaucratic nuisance and nonsense and improve interisland travel and tourism. The countries that will not make an effort to look for solutions could be excluded from the program and may be stuck with a cookie of their own dough, which is being considered “third-worldsy” by guests from abroad, compared to those destinations that are more competitive and in line with modern times.
Now that we have a fair overview of the opportunities, benefits, challenges, and issues, and we are looking back at what has not been realized, one might conclude that we have been dealing with stakeholders who have not tried hard enough, or are not willing to find a solution, or do not understand that airlift is a people business. So, be it. Just stubbornly keep holding summits and committee meetings, and keep the fictitious barriers in the skies, which symbolize to travelers that they are not as welcome as the promotions say.
Oh, and if those guests happen to come anyway, don’t forget to levy repelling taxes that are needed for tourism promotion to attract them. I’m not pro or contra anyone; I’m only pro for finding a solution when one is realistically within reach. Call it: “Caribbean Friendly Skies.”
Commander Bud Slabbaert
Dear Editor,
As an educator, when I read the news that our local University of St. Martin (USM) will become a branch, I just shook my head at the idea of making USM a branch campus of University of the Virgin Islands (UVI).
Dear Editor,
Today, Thursday, November 23, 2017, I witnessed a very troubling situation which resulted by the inability of the current government to manage the people’s health insurance. This way of working by incompetent and negligent people produced this situation.
Dear Editor,
Let’s start with the big one – Both sides have always recognized the need for an incinerator plant, which independently neither can afford. Positioning an incinerator plant for both countries to use would be the single ‘best’ shared investment solution, so at the top of this list.
Both sides need a prison – combined we are only 36 square miles, how many maximum security prisoners do we have between us? Or, are we going about this the wrong way? Should we under a partnership agreement with St. Martin export our serious criminals to the Guadeloupe penitentiary and in return offer our prison converted to a minimum security halfway house, where minor offenders can work (for minimal pay) during the day, clearing the dump, cleaning roads, or as labourers on construction sites learning a new trade for after their release?
Both sides need help to restructure their tax and immigration systems – so why can’t every resident on the island have ID cards which are linked not only to their immigration status but also to their tax records, so that if they are not both immigration and tax compliant they can be caught at routine traffic stops or at the airports on departure or arrival?
We had that tax system 20 years ago, who can forget the requirement of re-entry permits and confiscated passports! But, an ID card linked to the tax system would be so much simpler.
Both sides have horrendous traffic congestion – isn’t now the time to introduce a luxury tax on car imports of 50%, a gasoline tax of $2 per gallon and (lets go one step further), a $10 per day additional tax on all rental cars. Obviously this would only work if both sides of the island were to agree and make it law, but apart from generating tax revenue and reducing traffic, this would also stimulate the public transportation and taxi operators.
None of these car taxes are new to the Caribbean, most islands charge up to 100% luxury tax, gasoline is $5-$7 a gallon (and more across Europe), and where in the world can you rent a car for less than $100 per day, certainly not in any other Caribbean nation.
Both sides should provide ferry services – between Philipsburg and Marigot and branch out to all accessible hotels and beaches; apart from providing an additional form of public transportation, the ferry rides could be promoted as an island tourist attraction.
Come on St. Maarten/St. Martin. It’s easy to get buried by the problems and most of the above I am sure have already been discussed and considered, but when it requires legislation for both sides of the island to benefit, only together can we find the solutions.
Name withheld at author's request.
Dear Editor,
Good day, Minister Christophe Emmanuel. Allow me to bring this matter forward.
