It is quite appalling how the whole of the mainstream media in the Netherlands has ganged up to portray a very biased and slanderous vision of the events and electoral results from Sunday’s elections in Venezuela, in which 19 million people were called to elect the 545 members of the National Constituent Assembly.
Firstly, the Dutch media automatically questioned if indeed 8.1 million people turned out to vote Sunday. All the Dutch newspapers and websites point out that the Venezuelan Government claims that 8.1 million people voted, but that the opposition disagrees, claiming that only about two million people really came out to vote.
The newspaper Algemeen Dagblad, for instance, said Monday: “The opposition estimates that some 2.5 million people voted on Sunday. They fear that the authorities would come up with very different figures, which are a lot higher.”
The Dutch news website NU.nl also published: “According to the Electoral Council, 8.1 million Venezuelans had cast their vote, so it was officially announced on Monday. The opposition, which boycotted the vote, fights that number and says that it has been fraudulent. Only 2.5 million people would have cast their vote, says the opposition.”
Surprisingly, when those same Dutch media outlets reported on the unconstitutional “plebiscite” called by the opposition two weeks ago, on the 16th of July, they immediately reported (very as-a-matter-of-factly) that seven million people had participated in that event.
For instance, De Telegraaf wrote: “On Sunday, almost a third of the electorate voted in the symbolic referendum against the socialist government.” Also, Algemeen Dagblad wrote: “according to the first reports, 7.1 million votes were cast. The opposition will come with the outcome of the referendum later today.”
At no point they bothered portraying the position of the “chavismo”, which is basically that there was no way to determine how many people actually voted on the so-called plebiscite simply because there was no technical registration of voters (in fact many people voted three, four and even five times). In addition, they burned the papers accumulated on that day. Yet, such imprecision and affront to an electoral process and to democracy was applauded unquestionably by the mainstream media in the Netherlands.
On the other hand, Sunday’s elections in Venezuela were called upon and conducted according to the Venezuelan Constitution (Articles 347, 348 y 349). In addition, the Venezuelan National Electoral Commission (CNE) has already managed 20 democratic elections in the past 18 years, all free and fair, according to international organizations and even according to the Carter Centre. Different from the opposition “plebiscite” on 16 July, the elections held by the CNE Sunday are totally automated, hence data can be audited at any moment to legally prove the numbers provided.
Of course, in addition to technical voting aspects, you can also take a look at the photos and videos attached which show a massive number of Venezuelans who came out to vote Sunday in support of the Constituent Assembly as a mechanism to, above all, bring peace to the country. Indeed, the turn-out could have been larger had it not been for segments of the opposition that threatened people and in some places even locked out entire buildings and neighbourhoods, as to stop Venezuelans from voting.
Therefore, to be fair, the Dutch media should have either questioned both results, the one from the opposition plebiscite on the 16th of July and Sunday’s vote on the National Constituent Assembly, or agreed with both the ones provided by the opposition on the 16th of July and those provided by the CNE Sunday. Both should have been treated equally, but that did not happen.
Finally, all of the Dutch media copied and pasted one paragraph that says the following: “electors could not vote for or against the National Assembly. They could only vote for predominantly governmental candidates. This included the wife and son of President Nicolas Maduro on the electoral list.”
The wife and son of President Maduro were two of 6,000 candidates who ran in these elections, all coming from various regions and sectors of society such as: workers, students, peasants, indigenous populations, pensioners, businessmen and women, people with disabilities among others.
Also, these elections as well as the candidates’ nomination process were open to absolutely everyone and every sector of society. President Maduro reached out to every single agent of Venezuelan society. However, the hierarchy of the political opposition decided from day one that they were not interested in participating. It is no coincidence that that was also the position of US President Donald Trump, since America funds the Venezuelan opposition.
Recently, CIA Director Mike Pompeo admitted to be working behind scenes with Mexico and Colombia on a “transition” in Venezuela. Pompeo is the same person who once said that those who use waterboarding in the US “were not torturers but patriots.”
The Dutch media should at least portray both sides of the argument. Not doing so should not be called journalism but something else, and that is ultimately very damaging to Dutch readers and Dutch society in general.
By Alvaro Sanchez Cordero
Charge D'Affaires, a.i.
Embassy of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela in the Kingdom of the Netherlands
Dear Editor,
The title of this article reflects words echoed by Justice Minister Rafael Boasman in last week’s press briefing. In all honesty, this plea could not have occurred at a more opportune time – a time when the country has been thrust into complete turmoil by a government that has failed to protect its people. Sad to say, but this is the worst government since 10-10-10. It is an administration that is drowning in nepotism, and one that is giving away the country, day by day – the very conduct they have accused the opposition of practicing.
Minister Boasman seemed to be quite enthusiastic about collaborating with the Ministries of Social Affairs and Education, to have a discussion on why the country has shifted in this direction. What’s the use? All three ministries are well aware of what is causing this problem. Certainly, Minister Boasman needs to sit up and smell the coffee – burnt coffee that has been brewing and neglected for ages.
Right now, the community is fed up with the talking and reacting after the fact. Does the Minister think this useless rhetoric that he and his colleagues engage in every Wednesday morning is touching the lives of the people?
By now, Minister Boasman should know there is a total disconnect between government and the people, and unfortunately, the officials love it that way. The only politician who has my attention is the Minister of Finance Richard Gibson. One can appreciate the way he executes his task selflessly and with discipline, because of the vision he holds in his mind for this country. Thank goodness the island is blessed with a Finance Minister, who has shown consistency in working on this level of proficiency.
Furthermore, Minister Boasman should be conscious of the fact that a child learns what he or she lives, and that the environment is like the incubator for that youth. What would happen to that child if the incubator is filled with all kinds of harmful bacteria? The Minister should also realise that when a child reaches the age of 5, that youngster has already formed 80% of his or her perception of the world. So what view does a lot of our youngsters hold in their memory Minister? Is it that freshly-brewed tasty coffee or the one that is burnt, where the scent upsets the stomach of even the neighbours who live way down the street?
As mentioned, children learn what they live. With this in mind, has Minister Boasman taken time to analyse why he was chosen to be the Minister of Justice, when former Minister Edson Koringdongo was lauded publicly for a job well done by the MP, who had selected him for this position?
Then the nagging question is: If the minister did such a marvellous job, why was he removed from the position? During the formation of this government, the same MP announced he has put forward two names for the Ministry of TEATT. One candidate supposedly failed, but the current Minister’s name was never made public. Why is that?
Does it really have to take another rape to prick the minister’s conscience and wake him up from this deep slumber? How many infants, toddlers, young children, teenagers and adults have been raped, and are still forced into this evil submission? Have the community heard one word from the Ministries of Justice, Social Affairs and Education, prior to this incident? To say that this type of crime does not happen often is such a careless and unrealistic statement. One time is too many in the eyes of a Justice Minister, who cares about his people.
In addition, has this Justice Minister been paying attention to the different cultures that have brought their dirty habits with them, and now these conducts have become common place? He needs to look around and see which Caribbean countries are swimming in child molestation, and what has developed into common practice for people to rape their great grandmother. What about the drugs and guns that are pouring into the country? When will this cancer get the attention of government, other than the nonsensical rhetoric, just to appease the public?
It was an intriguing moment to hear a former MP, who stood up in Parliament and said that anybody can go anywhere and buy a gun. Then the question is: How is it that this transaction can occur so easily, and what is causing politicians to abstain from tackling this problem that is eating away the fabric of this society?
The only logical follow-up question is: Who is protecting these drug and gun pushers, and benefitting heavily from this money-spinning business? The answer to this inquiry can be acquired thoroughly, when government and parliament really sit up and smell the burnt coffee!
Joslyn Morton
Dear Editor,
We do agree with The Daily Herald’s Editorial of Saturday, July 22, 2017. However, as usual, Government’s effort to find a solution to a dangerous situation comes a bit late. As the saying goes “Wise after the horse has bolted”. Isn’t it rather obvious that that section of the road also needs a proper and safe walking path for pedestrians?
Why does it take the death of a visitor before preventive measures are taken? Will this be the case with the hazardous billboard that has been erected at the intersection of Billy Folly Road and Welfare Road?
It has been almost two months since we submitted our Letter of Protest to the Minister of Public Housing, Spatial Planning, Environment and Infrastructure VROMI. No response has been received. A Petition, signed by the residents of the neighbourhood, expressing their deep concerns with this unsafe billboard, has been submitted as well. We are now heading to the height of the hurricane season, and we reiterate: This billboard poses a hazard!
Will it take a serious accident involving a tourist before proper action is taken by the authorities? Will we again have to wait on Government to be worried after the billboard gives way as a result of continuous wind pressure, and falls on passers-by or private property?
When will Government decide to put the safety, welfare and public health of their citizens above that of special-interests groups?
Harry and Rita Halley
Dear Editor,
Our government has been hinting off and on of the possible implementation of additional taxes. These notifications don’t exactly lend confidence to the business community, but more particular scares the dickens out of the little man. The very idea that we are not told how our taxes are being spent is already a reason for resistance and confrontation.
We also remember too well that the now integrated turn over tax was introduced as a temporary measure that would have disappeared when our budgetary goals were met. Instead it was later raised from three to five percent with the assurance that the wage tax would be reduced; never happened and never will, for governments don’t usually give back injections to the budget, no matter how it pressures the people or the economy.
As a rule, we have a very serious problem with setting real priorities, which stem from our devotion to the next election, instead of the next generation. We read in the press last week that a speaker at the aviation seminar held here recently, cautioned Caribbean governments of continually adding taxes to airline tickets, for it will have the opposite effect than what we intend.
We know now that airfares are for 70 percent consistent of taxes fixed by government, be it federal, state, city or county. And the major airlines now servicing the destination are not going to remain loyal, if seat occupation doesn’t cover the costs of operation. We already know that we are one of the more expensive routes and have no control over that fact.
We are of course knowledgeable of the agreements government signed off on to enable the airport to secure the necessary financing for future development. To attempt now to unilaterally change or alter this can result in serious ramifications for both airport and country.
The expressed opinion of reverting the airport to a department of government is wishful and unreasonable thinking, not just for the fact of financing, but government’s inability to provide the minimum operational personnel in the past that caused us to almost be closed for safety concerns. It would appear that this government is running out of ideas to generate revenue, and of course, an additional tax, however detrimental seems ideal.
Other countries in the Caribbean have film festivals and music festivals which inject millions into the economy and create a substitute to ever-more taxation. The minister of finance in the first week of his term followed up on a set goal of having the casinos which were in arrears with their taxes pay up. For that he deserved the accolades and support he got, for it seems that the biggest fish somehow escaped the tax net.
So the question is what about the hotels? Are they compliant or do we have the same close-down story, while we expand regularly. What about the many car rentals that register half or more of their vehicles French, but continue to collect US $5.00 Government tax which is not turned in. What about applying the laws on the books for the hiring of illegals and no nationals, denying our children a chance at gainful employ.
We must believe that our government can be more decisive and creative in generating revenue for the provision of the services and infrastructure a modern society needs, and to simply consider additional taxes a cure-all. As the old folks say, you can’t get milk out of stone and with an economy with a less-than-one-percent growth room for additional taxes evaporates.
This society is hard pressed to keep up with the number of fees and taxes, and honestly can’t take anymore. Time to get to work; let’s truly build an equitable and fair society where everyone pays his/her fair share and is treated equally by the persons elected to do just that. Pet projects have their place, but not in times of belt tightening, lest that very belt becomes a noose.
Elton Jones
Dear Editor,
I would like to expound my views on public transportation, because my comrades have been badgering to talk about the industry. As a small-time labouring man, who has been going through the vicissitudes of life, I have very little time for anything else. But because my comrades would not let up, I have decided to put “pen on paper.” They have asked me a plethora of questions about the chaotic state of the industry. But the following questions are the most crucial ones.
Why have the St. Maarten-born bus drivers let a Haitian-born national run the show? Why have bus drivers refused to service the Middle Region and Sucker Garden route? Why do gypsies blatantly pick up people within the confines of the bus stops?
The answer to the first question is a simple one: The Constitution of Country St. Maarten gives every Dutch citizen (the person in question has a Dutch passport) inalienable rights. The answer to the second question is a very difficult one: I have spoken with some of the bus drivers who used to service the Middle Region and Dutch Quarter route. They told me the new road is a “major problem.” According to them, the way the cement was laid is detrimental to the bushings and the bearings of the buses. But since I am not a mechanic, I have no opinion about that. What I do know is, Middle has become exclusively gypsy territory.
The answer to the final question is quite obvious. The government, the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of TEATT, and some members in the “top brass” of the police force are gypsy-friendly. Even parliament is “wrapped up in the brew.” Nobody in government is on the side of the legitimate, tax-paying bus drivers. The legitimate bus drivers have to toe the line, while the illegal bus drivers and the gypsies (seemingly) have been given cart blanch to ply for hire among us. “Ain't that a shame?”
Comrades, there are about 300 buses on the road. Yes, 300 buses and innumerable gypsies run on the roads of this 16-square mile island. Let me give kudos to the former minister of TEATT Ingrid Arrindell for controlling the unending requests for “help drivers” during her tenure. When a prime minister would deem it necessary to issue “help-driver” permits to what is evidently a money racket, something is terribly wrong with that prime minister.
Maybe the special Anti-Corruption Taskforce of the Kingdom Detective Team RST, under the supervision of an Investigating Judge, should look into the situation. Or maybe if Dutch MPs Andre Bosman (VVD) and Ronald van Raak (SP) should start "running off" their mouths about integrity breaches regarding public transportation, then government would get a wake-up call.
And our local MPs would diatribe against Dutch interference. They would say, "The Dutch want to trample on our autonomy." Tommyrot! The country is seven years old. What has our Parliament done to have public transportation regulated properly? Nothing!
Comrades, I will be back in a little while with another hot issue.
Julien F. Petty
