Dear Editor,
At the end of every school year, students are evaluated and promoted or not promoted based on their performance during the year. Conversely, at the end of a parliamentary year, Members of Parliament are not evaluated, yet they continue in parliament without anyone questioning their achievements, their performance or their competency to function as a parliamentarian.
I have observed that in several countries around the world, political and interest groups are developing report cards for parliamentarians. The idea behind the report card is to provide the public, especially the voters, with information about the performance of a parliamentarian so that at the next election, voters can make an informed decision about who is best suited to represent them in parliament, based on their performance during the past years.
I sincerely hope that MP Ardwell Iron’s proposal to report on how Members of Parliament voted during a parliamentary year will be included in the 2016-2017 Parliamentary Report. If included, it will give the public additional information as to how our MPs are functioning.
SMCP is developing a parliamentarian report card that will comprise the following benchmarks: attendance, participation, representation, supervision, legislation and interaction. These six benchmarks are derived from the job description of a parliamentarian that, according to our Constitution, consists of three main functions: representation (art. 44), legislation (art. 82, 85, 86) and supervision (art. 62, 63, 64). Since the people (voters) placed their trust in a parliamentarian by electing him/her to office, it goes without saying that they should know how their parliamentarian is functioning. Therefore, let us look at these benchmarks and explain briefly what each one entails.
Attendance at meetings is the most obvious and objective benchmark. It includes the attendance at the plenary sessions of parliament, and at the meetings of the central committee. All MPs are required to attend these two meetings. In addition, we will also include the attendance at the permanent and ad hoc committees, which is a requirement for the members of these committees, but is voluntary for the other parliamentarians.
It seems as if parliamentarians do not realize that the greater part of their work occurs in the small or standing committees. These committees are therefore the backbone of parliament. In a press conference given the first week of January 2017, President of Parliament, MP Sarah Wescot-Williams told the press, “The work of Parliament is being slowed down due to the lack of activity by the parliamentary committees”. In other words, she is saying these committees are not functioning.
Parliamentary Committees do the groundwork for the Central Committee. They research and investigate issues and laws then make recommendations to the Central Committee, which in turn will eventually approve these recommendations, and send them to the plenary session of parliament. In addition, most of the oversight work by parliament ought to be done in the standing committees.
There is where the chair and members review the policies and the decisions of a minister or the government, as well as investigate reports, complaints and problems related to a ministry or the government. Further, there is where questions directed to a minister or the government ought to be formulated and the answers reviewed for depth, thoroughness and accuracy.
Sadly, previous Annual Parliamentary Reports and observations during the current parliamentary year show that the standing committees hardly ever meet. During 2016-2017, twelve standing committees were installed, but as far as we know, only two of these committees actually held meetings, namely the Ad Hoc Integrity Committee and the Petitions Committee. The remaining committees have remained dormant throughout the parliamentary year.
We would also like to point out a serious flaw in the selection of the chairpersons of the various standing committees. Members of the coalition chair all twelve standing committees. No wonder that the supervisory function of parliament is seriously compromised. One does not expect a coalition member in parliament to readily scrutinize and criticize the policies, decisions and performance of his/her coalition partner in the government.
For example, with all the problems surrounding the Ministry of Justice, the Chairman of the Committee of Justice MP Frans Richardson never felt the need to call a meeting of this Committee. Further, with all the problems associated with the dump, the Chairman of the Committee of Public Housing, Spatial Planning, Environment and Infrastructure MP Drs. Rodolphe Samuel never called a meeting. The same goes for all the other standing committees.
Under the topic of attendance, I would like to mention here that it is unacceptable that mature Members of Parliament still have to be chided by the President of Parliament for being absent at meetings without due notice. With today’s plethora of technology – and mind you our MPs receive a smartphone at the beginning of their term of office – it is inexcusable that an MP still does not care to inform the President in a timely manner of his/her absence.
So, with regard to attendance, an MP’s report card will summarize his/her absence or presence, with or without notice at all meetings. But the attendance score related to the standing committees will weigh much heavier than the attendance at the other parliamentary meetings.
In the following article, we will elucidate the other five benchmarks of the MP Report Card.

Wycliffe Smith
Leader of the Sint Maarten Christian Party

Dear Editor,
Do you know what is considered garbage here on Sint Maarten? Coming from me, I believe you would expect me to have an idea. But when cut grass has to be bagged and if not bagged, one is threatened with a fine of NAf.1000 if deposited in those large garbage bins along the road, then I do not know.
All of this I found out because in the week of August 7th to the 12th, after 20 years of depositing cut grass in whatever kind of garbage bin I used over those years, my garbage was not collected. On informing in the neighbourhood, I found out that several other bins were also not emptied which also contained cut grass. Mind you, not branches from trees, just plain old everyday cut grass.
I thought that I was out of touch with the trash business, but more people in the neighbourhood were also not aware of the – what we accept as stipulations concerning garbage collection – if there are any. I know that more and more environmentalists are convincing their governments of the damage the use and not correct disposal of plastic bags is causing to the ecology of the country. Since a few years now legislation has been introduced and dealt with but not completed, to get rid of plastic bags.
When we are obliged to bag our cut grass, what bags are we supposed to use? And then that threat of a fine of one thousand guilders, is this the law? Should we really pay a fine for trying to keep Sint Maarten clean?
Then there is talk about legalizing gypsies. When government cannot place bus stops on government-owned land to help regulate (bus) traffic. When bus permit holders determine which routes they are going to service, creating even more attractive routes for gypsies, what is there to be expected? Should I be surprised if garbage collectors lay down their own laws?
The banana plant is a very useful and a nourishing plant that is why I do not appreciate the term 'banana republic', but this kind of proceeding of government invites these observations. While we are on the topic of garbage, let me state this. I was told on several occasions that I should clean my car. That is because if I did not take a bag along with me in which I can put my garbage, because I do not throw my garbage on the road. I will accept being told that my car is dirty before throwing garbage on the road.
But this is not about me. I am still convinced that Sint Maarten is the only place with plastic-bottle trees, beside fruit trees. I am on the road at least five times a week. I pass those young men either with weed eaters or garbage bags cleaning the side of the road and gathering up the paper and plastic bottles from the side of the road, and promptly the next morning there is the same number of bottles and same amount of paper or sometimes even more.
Since the saying is 'It's raining cats and dogs' those bottles have to be falling off the trees, because I really do not believe there are so many inconsequential people on this piece of rock. By the way, isn't grass biodegradable?

Russell A. Simmons

Dear Editor,

The first time I represented the island abroad I was 19 years old. After going through a vetting process (written and oral) I was selected to attend the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (UNESCO) World Heritage and Youth Leadership conference in Montego Bay, Jamaica. However, I would have been the one to go nonetheless, because I was the only one who completed the application!

In the past two years I have had the opportunity to represent St. Maarten and attend various leadership, empowerment or sustainability programmes around the world. That one trip to Jamaica motivated me to be one of the few and sometimes the only Caribbean voice at those international platforms.

By default, every St. Maartener is an ambassador of the island. With the thousands we currently have abroad, whenever they meet someone new one of the first questions they’ll get is “Where is that?” That will prompt questions about the island, history, culture, economy and so forth. A question that must be asked, however, is how much do our students know about their island?

I firmly believe knowledge of one’s heritage plays a major role in building self-confidence which in return will foster boldness and courage in our youth. I realised that some of these conferences intimidate our youth either because of the requirements, distance or cost. I too had fears several times I applied to certain programmes. There were times when I was the youngest or least “educated” yet I found myself being respected in the debates or workshops.

Such experiences have taught me to never underestimate oneself and I hope to see more young people with the same mindset. Imagine the intimidation being the only black person in a plane and airport in Russia. That’s what I dealt with and overcame. I believe that St. Maarten has way too many talented and brilliant young minds to not encourage them to represent not just the island but also the Caribbean.

I think it’s time we add structure or create a programme where our young people can get the opportunity to be an ambassador for the island; whether it’s in the arts, academics, science, business, leadership and other fields. Currently there are hundreds of seminars and conferences happening internationally that we can benefit from by having a youth representative.

Whether through the youth department or tourism department, I believe we need to set a solid structure on the requirements and responsibilities of a youth ambassador. Since most times I travelled through self-will, I encouraged others to do so via social media, and also talking to students at different schools. However, I wish there was a system in place to submit reports on the conferences, brainstorm ideas and form partnerships or enhance existing programmes with the knowledge gained.

Companies should also be able to support because it’s an investment in a better island. Most importantly, these seminars and conferences help with personal development through the skills one develops such as public speaking, listening, (underrated skill), debating, networking and intercultural communication. Not to mention it provides the opportunity to broaden one’s view of the world as travelling is one of the best ways to do so.

With all that being said, I strongly urge our youth to take the opportunity themselves to be global citizens and gain the necessary experience and knowledge we desperately need to help us move forward. There are websites and Facebook pages such as Youth Opportunity and Opportunity Desk which constantly post seminars, conferences and competitions which we are eligible to attend.

No matter which field you’re in, research programmes and workshops that will be taking place and let’s get this island to be more global! We have the brains and talent; it is now time to put the resources behind them.

Ralph Cantave

Dear Editor,
As has been confirmed by both the opposition party and the now defunct former coalition party, Minister Plasterk’s tenure has been a big failure, both when it comes to his domestic dossiers and his dealings with the islands of the former Netherlands Antilles. In my personal opinion, he is by far the worst Minister handling the portfolio dating back as far as I can remember, and the many critical letters he has received from the Government of Sint Eustatius are a testament to that. On top of that, time and again, Minister Plasterk has proven to be unreliable, of bad faith, and not open and honest to the general public and even the Dutch Parliament.
The latter has been very critical of the Minister’s handling of his portfolio and has questioned and reprimanded him on numerous occasions. Minister Plasterk has also been criticized by the Raad van State (Council of State) for breaking the law, as he ignored legal advice from different sources. It is therefore no surprise that even within the Dutch council of ministers Plasterk was not really taken seriously. The main cause for this was because he was not really in charge of his ministry and left decision making up to his top civil servants. This was mentioned in a newspaper article in the Antilliaans Dagblad on August 10, 2017.

Just to name a few of Plasterk’s failures:
•The unlawful interference in the internal affairs of Sint Maarten and Aruba by giving the (former) Governors of the islands instructions.
•Wasting money on the IdeeVersa and Spies reports without implementing the recommendations
•Committing payments to KPMG without the approval of the Island Council
•Hiding the report about the malfunctioning of former kingdom representative Wilbert Stolte and BZK in particular, and not following through with its recommendations.
Plasterk will be meeting with the Executive and Island Councils of Sint Eustatius on August 14, as part of his farewell tour of the islands. Unfortunately, he has not much to be proud of.
In contrast, the current coalition Government of Sint Eustatius, which met the government administration in complete disarray, and the fact that the island was stuck at the same level of development of 30 years ago, has been able to start a number of initiatives which Minister Plasterk has been trying to boycott, while creating the impression that he wanted to help the island move forward.
These include: finalizing the agreement with NuStar; permanently filling key management and other positions which are crucial to improving the functioning of government; starting with the preparations of fixing the roads by local contractors; improving the ICT infrastructure and functioning; setting up an economic development council; engaging in talks with foreign investors and other partners in the field of aviation, logistics; preparing a draft Constitution for Sint Eustatius, and carrying out a feasibility study for Sint Eustatius

All these initiatives, and more which are being prepared, are the accomplishments of the democratically-elected government of Sint Eustatius, headed by my coalition partner Reuben Merkman and I.
As is widely known, Plasterk and his party suffered a debilitating and humiliating defeat at the latest polls in the Netherlands. The current caretaker Dutch coalition government already lacks majority support in the Dutch Parliament, and might even fall before the new government is installed.
Based on Plasterk’s dismal performance since he took office, and the reaction to it by the Dutch voters during the last elections, I suggest that in his talks with the Government of Sint Eustatius, Plasterk humbles himself again, and shows the respect due to the democratically-elected and appointed local representatives of Sint Eustatius.
I am aware of Plasterk's recent letter and remarks. It is clear by the actions of BZK that he is purposely ignoring the legal standpoint taken by Sint Eustatius and is having an open dialogue about it. It is also clear that he is unlawfully trying to take over the local government under the guise of higher supervision by putting in place failed and recycled Dutch civil servants, a phenomenon which has been pointed out by the Antilliaans Dagblad a few months ago.
I am hereby cautioning Plasterk that any attempt at interfering with – or removing this democratically-elected government via the acting governor or others – will be met with fierce resistance. The consequences will be for Plasterk’s account, and if he and the Dutch government have learned anything from history, they would be well-advised to do the right thing while he still has the chance.

Clyde I. van Putten
Leader of Government of St. Eustatius