Dear Editor,
It is important to evaluate our representatives in Parliament on an annual basis and not wait until election time. Therefore, St. Maarten Christian Party (SMCP) is developing a parliamentary report card that will indicate how well or how poorly our Members of Parliament (MPs) are doing in the following six areas: attendance, participation, representation, supervision, legislation and interaction. In a previous letter to the Editor, we covered the reason for and the nature of the report card and presented an extensive description of the first benchmark, attendance.
Later on, we dealt with the following benchmarks: participation, representation and supervision. And finally we will describe the last two benchmarks of the report card i.e. legislation and interaction.
The legislative function of Parliament is anchored in article 82 of the Constitution, which states, “National ordinances shall be enacted jointly by the Government and Parliament.” In other words, Parliament is co-legislator together with Government. Parliament as well as Government may initiate or draft laws, which must follow the legally prescribed route and procedures in order to reach their final destination, which is approval by Parliament.
During the first six years of Parliament, approximately 40 laws were presented by the Government and passed by Parliament. With the exception of the budget laws, all the other laws were adoptions or amendments to laws that were already in force in the Netherlands Antilles.
Sadly, in the nearly seven years of the existence of our Parliament, not one law, initiated or drafted by Parliament itself, reached its final destination. The very first draft initiative ordinance, namely the law to eliminate the abuse of the temporary labour contract, was submitted on June 6, 2012 by the National Alliance (NA) fraction. That was more than five years ago. To date this law has not been approved but is still in the pipeline.
When we look at individual parliamentarians initiating laws, the annual reports of Parliament only make mention of Petrus de Weever who submitted a motion in June 2011 to amend the timeshare laws in St. Maarten. However, according to The Daily Herald of April 12, 2013 MPs Frans Richardson and Johan Leonard also submitted a draft initiative law to ban the import, distribution and sale of plastic bags. In conclusion, the legislative functioning of Parliament and of parliamentarians, as far as initiating laws is concerned, is seriously lacking and would certainly receive a failing grade.
Interaction refers to parliamentarians interfacing and communicating with the voters and the public. During the campaign period, prospective parliamentarians were daily in the face of the people. They interacted on a one-on-one basis or with groups via social media, radio and television talk shows, home contact meetings, town hall and public meetings. However, after the election all contact with the people was severed. In fact, it seems as if parliamentarians now try to avoid the public.
The interaction benchmark will evaluate how parliamentarians stay in touch with the public. They will be evaluated on how frequently they interact via their websites and other social media.
We will look at how often a parliamentarian goes on radio and television talk shows to inform or enlighten the public about issues relevant to them and their community. Does he/she keep in touch with the people via the print media or via town hall meetings? Does the parliamentarian visit companies, organisations or businesses to get a first-hand feel of what is going on? The interaction benchmark will give the people an idea of how well or how poorly a parliamentarian is keeping in touch with the public.
In SMCP’s Manifesto, a chapter was included entitled “Post-Election Agenda.” The purpose of this activity is to keep in touch with the people. Most political parties and their candidates only reach out to the public prior to the elections to get your vote. But SMCP believes that the people are always important and therefore wants to also reach out to the people after the election. The party planned to do so via general membership meetings, media and social media, lectures and town hall meetings. I have not seen this kind of commitment to the voters and the public in any other Manifesto.
Rather than wait until campaign time to talk about what a parliamentarian did or did not do and how well or how poorly he/she executed their parliamentary functions, the SMCP intends to evaluate members of Parliament at the end of each parliamentary year and present their scorecard to the general public.
Consequently, at the end of their term of office, the public can judge for itself as to which parliamentarians were functioning and which ones were not. The parliamentarian who attended meetings, represented and interacted with the people, carried out his/her supervisory task, etc. deserves another chance.
But the parliamentarian who said nothing of substance in Parliament, who did not read the documentation, who did not attend meetings and who did not interact with the public should definitely not be rewarded with another four years in Parliament. The report card is simply a tool to help the people make the right choice.
Wycliffe Smith
Leader of the St. Maarten Christian Party
Dear Editor
The public entities Bonaire, St. Eustatius, and Saba, have reached parity with the Netherlands where it concerns sharing the cost of running and developing these three islands. What this means is that the islands and Holland are sharing the cost (almost) equally.
The facts, according to the Annual Accounts of the Dutch Ministry of Finance, show that in 2016 the total expenditure on the three islands was 298 million euros; of this amount 146 million euros was raised on the islands through taxes by the Dutch tax regime. That is a 51 to 49 per cent division for Holland and the islands respectively.
This information is very important in light of Statia’s expressed desire for a more autonomous position in the kingdom and being able to do more decision-making locally.
It is also important to counter the continued disinformation and misinformation being spread by opponents of more autonomy who have no limits spreading lies and false information to confuse the people of Statia shamelessly.
As I have written in the past, I regularly listen to the weekly radio programme of the Statia Democratic Party (DP) aired on Friday’s and hosted by the DP leader and Island Council member Adelka Spanner, Island Council member Koos Sneek, and party candidate and advisor Ernie Simmons. These folks leave no stone unturned in trying to convince the public in Statia that we as an island cannot handle autonomy because of the high cost and our inability and limitations. The worst part is they resort to outright lies in trying to convince the public and make their point.
Time and again I hear these folks say that Holland is spending three to four times our tax revenues on top of those taxes that we pay. That would mean that Holland spends as much as five times our tax revenues on these islands, which would be five times 146 million equals 730 million euros per year. Compare that with the actual spending of 298 million in 2016.
It is therefore clear that these folks are peddling false and misleading information on a weekly basis in their programme. And despite my earlier stories on this behaviour they continue to find new topics with which to mislead their listeners. The desperation drips off by the bucket loads.
The constitutional future of a people is a serious matter and the least the people must expect from their leaders and politicians, media, and others in the public eye, is that they provide factual and accurate information that serves to educate our people and not to mislead as we ponder decisions of such magnitude. In this respect the DP radio programme fails miserably, but wilfully, since they have been put in the spotlight on this already.
Numbers will change from year to year and if the Dutch Government would release tax information for each island we would know exactly where Statia stands in this. What is also clear is that in the first years of this new status much had to be invested in upgrades and innovations, and working away backlogs in education, healthcare, infrastructure, and other areas. As these investments are completed and austerity measures are implemented over time, the spending of the Dutch Government will decline.
Due to population growth and economic growth, tax revenues can be expected to increase over time, and as a result the portion of expenditures covered by the islands can be expected to increase. I predict it will not be long before we will move from parity to dominance, meaning the islands completely covering their full cost. We see it happening now in the now autonomous countries Aruba, Curaçao, and St. Maarten, so why not in our islands as well, with proper financial management and smart economic development.
There is hope for Statia, and we Statia people must keep the faith. Nothing comes easy in life but the harder and longer the struggle, the sweeter will be the victory; so press on toward more autonomy, in Jesus name.
Glenn Schmidt
Statia
Dear Editor,
I read Mr. Ferrier's letter to you concerning the homeless and immediately Statia came to mind. The first time I visited St. Eustatius, was in 1976 to assist our colleagues with the celebration of the Bicentennial. Since then after hurricane LUIS in 1995 I went to replace the post Commandant yearly when he went on vacation. The lay of the land intrigued me and I wondered why were we not getting any more Statia Yams. Then the thought came to me that this could be a solution to get the illegal drug addicts off the road and make them also productive at the same time.
As the Dutchman would say: "twee vliegen in een klap." I am not a professional social worker and do not know exactly how it should be done, but my idea at that time was to gather those illegal drug addicts and have them plant food on a designated piece of land on Statia and house them and treat them there until they recovered. Yes, I am aware that 10-10-'10 is usually used as a scapegoat when we try to cross borders, but then why are we a part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands?
Why is Mark Rutte the Prime Minister of the Kingdom of the Netherlands and not only of Holland? If that is so, should not William Marlin use the title Chief Minister like is done in Anguilla which is also part of the (United Kingdom) Great Britain? And should we not stress on the word reciprocity?
So yes I agree with Mr. Ferrier that we should have that conversation and with everybody who is willing to help. If there is a will there should be a way and that should be much cheaper than sending our sick to Columbia and Santo Domingo. I hope also that we reach much further than we have reached with our air traffic. I do not understand why, if there is an airline which belongs to the Kingdom (KLM) why we would have so much trouble travelling between the islands of the Kingdom? Not to mention the airfare. If we are part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands and we have ships which travel all over the world (KNSM) why can't we have at least one ship travelling between the islands of the Kingdom?
The Dutch are stressing on us about integrity, can I ask Mr. Bosman who always knows the answers when it comes to Kingdom relations, especially between Holland and the other islands, if this kind of behaviour of Holland falls under the heading of “lack of integrity?” Are we really willing to solve problems?
Russell A. Simmons
Dear Editor,
There is no universal definition for luxury tourism. One person’s luxury is another’s ordinary.
Even if there was a definition of a tweet length, what purpose does it serve? Why hide behind academic fabricated definition that is no better than an astrological horoscope profile that one can read in a boulevard magazine. Everyone has his own perception what luxury tourism is, according to his own needs, desires or commercial interests. All the perceptions have wild variations.
The perspectives are also multi-layered. There is already a distinction between ultra-luxury and affordable luxury. For those who like the idea of developing luxury tourism for the benefit of a destination how about a straight talk three-word definition like “Big Spender Tourism?”
The first thing that may come to mind for the development of such tourism segment is five-star-plus hotels. I would consider such naive thinking. My primary thoughts would be about what this clientele is really looking for, how does it fit in their lifestyle, and what might meet their expectations.
Here are the ten things that they expect:
* Secluded pristine white sandy beachfront with crystal clear and turquoise waters.
* Lush tropical emerald greenery with palm trees and flower bursting landscaped gardens.
* Boutique properties styled after traditional island architecture.
* Harmonious sense of place that blends masterfully into the natural surroundings.
* Private utopia to unwind, lifetimes away from the hustle and bustle.
* Daily life adorned with elegance, intimacy and serenity.
* Savouring the spice-of-life in a heaven like paradise.
* Impeccable personalised, detail-oriented service delivered by a passionate team.
* Unmatched sophisticated amenities in style with contemporary comforts.
* Cultural authenticity and genuine conviviality of the Caribbean.
These are the development benchmarks that need to be considered. If one cannot meet eight of the ten on this list, the advice would be to try, try harder or start re-thinking. Mind that this listing nowhere includes the two words that you might have expected, “luxury” or even “hotel.” Commonly recognised as the Caribbean hub for exclusive guests like celebrities and tycoons, St. Barths apparently has twice as many villas that are rented out than it has hotel rooms.
The next thing that may come to mind as essential to develop this exclusive tourism segment is to have a big international airport to receive these guests; again, naive thinking. If we use a bit more class and elegance to replace the crude definition “Big Spender Tourism,” this category of people is usually known as high-net-worth-individuals (HNWI) and ultra-high-net-worth-individuals (UHNWI).
Most of these affluent persons arrive on private jets. Many of these jets only need a runway of about 5,000 feet/1500 metres even when they come from far-away. Some of the most beloved island destinations worldwide can only be reached via a hub airport. The one claim that can be made with high accuracy is that “Big Spenders” typically don’t arrive from abroad with cheap airlines or low-cost-carriers.
Surveys and research in the Caribbean have indicated that private flyers spend an average of US$ 69,000 on that destination. Furthermore, these visitors do have the means to invest in a destination, if they like the location. It underlines the thesis that depending on “headcount statistics” is one of the worst mistakes made in tourism development. How much each “head” actually spends is a better indicator for what concept should be advanced. To top it all off, HNWI are more loyal visitors to return to a particular destination and in many cases more than once per year. Destinations that offer more authenticity and are less commercialised are more to their liking. These people may not be considered vacationers anymore.
The multiple visits can make them integrated part-time members of the community and they may become valued friends. There is not only a positive economic impact coming from this visitor segment. It has a positive social impact also. The affluent individuals are usually successful individuals. The saying goes that success breeds success. It may be a bit of exaggeration but it could rub off on a community that has to adapt to the expectations and demands of their guests who are actually raising the bar.
The upscale guests who have personal preferences that combine enrichment, enjoyment, but also education, can encourage communities to maintain their culture and society. They appreciate access to the local people, places and experiences that represent all that is authentic about a destination.
Becoming more affected to a community and destination may result in an increased willingness to assist in improving the quality of life of the members of a community. These visitors, who often wish to immerse into local culture more than ever before, will protect the natural resources and the culture of a destination for future generations.
A fact is that on the international tourist market, there is one segment that keeps expanding regardless of any set-backs, be it recession, increased full prices, currency fluctuations; the upscale or luxury market remains on top like oil on water.
I’m not advocating that luxury tourism is something all could or should pursue. In cases where destinations put more emphasis on mass-tourism, it is hardly feasible because the two segments are like the oil of the affluent and the water of the masses, and they just don’t mix.
While others see the minimum standard of luxury tourism as the development of five-star hotels, I have tried to give you a different exclusive boutique perspective. You can believe and do what you want, but if all of the above is appealing for destination tourism development, the clear-text advice is “If you really want it, get your back up off the wall and get down it.”
Commander Bud Slabbaert,
Initiator and coordinator of the annual Caribbean Aviation Meetup conference
Dear Editor,
Nowadays, short of quarantining oneself completely, there is no escape from the news, particularly from reports of folks going back in the past, seemingly, in an effort to address and redress past and present ills. These reports and September’s back-to-school fast approaching may have stirred up old impressions and prompted this attempt to revisit the Sandy Ground of the mid 50s and early 60s, the Sandy Ground of my youth: the old Sandy Ground.
