Dear Editor,
Kindly allow me to respond to the article of Mr. Koos Sneek which was placed in The Daily Herald of December 5, 2016 with regard to the mobile phone companies on St. Eustatius.
I find it highly unfortunate and disappointing that our elected official, in what seems an attempt solely for political purposes, would choose to present misleading information which would only serve to stir up more confusion in what is an already complicated situation. As a small island community, the public expects our officials to be uplifting and when needed constructively critical. However, this seems to be a case of criticism taking a malicious tone that only seeks to divide us as a community by creating unsubstantiated rumours. As a rule I generally try not to go back and forth in the newspaper, however, councilman Sneek’s comments leave me no choice but to respond, if for no other reason than to state the facts.
Mr. Sneek incorrectly stated that Eutel had two concessions, one which they use for each mobile carrier partner, which is not correct. Each mobile operator is issued one mobile concession, which it uses to provide service to its clients. Mr. Sneek also states that the Island Government issued a business licence to a second mobile operator, erroneously implying that the Island Government somehow did this with the intent to destroy Eutel.
Mr. Sneek, who has been involved for many years with the Business Association and Chamber of Commerce, and also served as Commissioner in the Executive Council, knows that a legitimate request of any business for a business licence must be honoured by the Island Government unless there are very significant supporting arguments to the contrary. A point he argued in the interest of several businesses over the past years.
Mr. Sneek also seems to object to the presence of Windward Island Cellular WICC (a subsidiary of UTS and the licenced mobile concession holder) who is a legally established business registered in the local Chamber of Commerce, which he also referred to as a foreign business. Mr. Sneek forgot to mention that this company, through its local partnership, has been providing the leading mobile services to its Statia Chippie clients for the last decade.
However, he does seem to want to welcome a legitimate foreign company, namely KPN under the conditions that he specifies in his article. In addition to all of this, he also fails to mention/realise that the company which he refers to as “foreign” through its partnership with Gem Enterprises, is providing employment to five “local” staff directly, and income to several other “locals” who provide services to them.
On the issue of Gem Enterprises NV (our family-owned business) for which Mr. Sneek implies that I misused my position within Government to somehow cause them to do business at the Mazinga complex. I shall not dignify these comments and insinuations with a response, as again these go to the lowest level or rumour and other false implications not expected from any responsible citizen let alone an elected member of our island council.
I assume that Mr. Sneek, who is also a business owner, is implying here that anyone serving or having served in Government should close down all business interests once in public office such as to not have any conflict of interest.
Here again he fails to inform the public that this is not the case as I am sure he is aware, more than most citizens, that there are checks and balances in place and requirements of all public officials to register and make known all business and financial activities of their own to the kingdom representative before assuming office and again when leaving office. But that aside, I welcome any inquiry in this regard should there be any doubt regarding my activities before, during or after my tenure in public service.
Any vibrant economy thrives on competition. We have seen for years the result of monopolistic companies and the effect on service to our little island. In the short time the two separate mobile operators have been engaged on Statia, we have already seen the service offering to the people of Statia improve and quality of service offering increase. I am sure this trend that will continue in the future.
The community of Statia deserves, just like any other, the right to choose. And at least with regard to mobile service now they have that choice. I think this is a moment Statian’s at home and abroad should be proud that as a small economy our people, like all others, will have the right to choose. And the spirit of competition will bring about increased service both in quality and quantity. Anyone choosing to see this as negative would leave one to wonder what their real motive and agenda is.
We look forward to be of service to the people of Statia for many years to come. We hope that the same way we were inspired by other local entrepreneurs, others will be inspired as well to start their business and provide quality products and services to the people of Statia because our community needs us all.
On behalf of Staff, Management and Clients of Gem Enterprises NV
Gerald Berkel
Dear Editor,
Police Officer Richmer Michel Patrick York is entitled to a just and fair court hearing which he has not yet received.
Police Officer R.M.P York is not a villain, nor is he a criminal but is rather a victim.
Police Officer R.M.P. York is an innocent victim that is being falsely and wrongfully accused of the shooting death of Mr. Hakeem Isidora. Officer York is also the victim of a distressingly faulty system – systemic malfunctioning law enforcement and justice chain involving the legal, Police Force, judiciary and penal prison system that have repeatedly skirted freely obtainable and easily accessible information that is vital, essential and directly related to Police Officer York’s court case, that if ever examined, would result in the consequential speedy exoneration and hasty release of Police Officer York from the present confines of prison.
This skirting of and omission of prior disclosure of information critical to the consequential exoneration and subsequent release from prison of Officer York represents a grisly violation of Officer York’s basic human rights to a just and fair trial in the court of law. This tragic violation of York’s right also represents a pitiful breach of the system of democracy.
The court proceedings, hearing and possible verdict relating to Officer York’s court case, slated for December 7, 2016, at the Philipsburg Courthouse, should not and cannot rightfully be the last hearing pertaining to Officer York’s court case until all of the relevant facts and pertinent information is properly and appropriately presented to the court in a manner and setting that is dignified and respectful of our democracy, judiciary and of the accused Police Officer Richman Michel Patrick York.
Cimmaron Marlin
President, The Talking Drums Foundation
Dear Editor,
Please allow me some space to air my frustration over the road situation at Cupper Drive, St. Peters (location of Sister Magda Primary School and St. Maarten Academy, together about 700-800 students).
Dear Editor,
I would like to give a special thank you to SMMC nurse Monique Gumbs for a job well done. Mr. Provance was admitted to the SMMC; this patient was taken care of by the nurses of the SMMC. When we his friends came to visit him we were amazed to see how this patient was looking. When we asked who did such a good job for this gentleman we were told it was done by Nurse Monique and that is what she does for each and every patient for many years.
Mr. P. was looking new, face shaved, haircut and well clothed. Nurse Monique does supply clothes, toothbrush, comb, etc. for patients that do not have anything or cannot afford.
Soon after some of his family arrived in St. Maarten they came to the SMMC to visit their uncle. They all were pleased they got to see him before he died. Once one of his family members went to the nurses’ station and asked if she could see Nurse Monique. The lady told the nurse that she does not know Nurse Monique and Nurse Monique doesn’t know her, but she would like to get to meet Nurse Monique personally to give a word of thanks and let her know we, the family, appreciate such a job well done for our uncle.
After getting to meet Nurse Monique the family sat around his bedside relaxed and comfortable, knowing he was well taken care of until the last breath left him. May his soul rest in peace.
Good job Nurse Monique. God bless you and the rest of the nurses. Just could not keep it to ourselves.
Family and friends of the late Mr. Provance
Dear Editor,
After reading the verdict in the case of the new hospital I eagerly awaited a response from the “guilty” parties, namely Minister VSA, SZV and SMMC. I was hoping for some show of remorse from these fine people for trying to manipulate the process to their own advantage. After all the Minister VSA, during his tenure as Minister and his most recent political campaign, proclaimed a promise of transparency and good Governance, that promise has been broken.
Instead, I read only of disappointment with the verdict and the delays it will cause in the execution of this corrupt tender process. The court verdict was very clear that the whole process in selecting a winning bidder lacked transparency and went against all principles of good Governance.
In any other developed nation persons would be impeached and/or end up in jail for trying to circumvent the laws that govern us.
Accountability is a fundamental requirement of good governance and we need to start holding our elected and appointed officials personally accountable for their actions. This accountability should be applied throughout the Government through to the government- owned companies, holding directors and executives being personally accountable and financially liable for any decisions they make.
Executives and directors at government-owned companies rarely face personal liability for failures of oversight that lead to large penalties or losses to these organisations.
We need to demand that these persons playing with our taxpayer money be held personally accountable and financially liable for any unscrupulous behaviour. This can be negligence, ethics violations, direction to subordinates that is contrary to or expands beyond existing law, breach of contract, lack of transparency etc.
Penalties for unscrupulous behaviour or for improper use of public funds should result in imprisonment, fines, forfeiture, punitive damages and ineligibility for public office.
Once we can start prosecuting our elected and appointed officials and recover our wasted taxpayer money, we may see these individuals executing their duties and responsibilities with greater care.
Name withheld at author’s request.
