Dear Editor,
Somebody is telling untruths and he or she knows it. The question is: Where to find the facts and why are they being concealed? Just to show how horrible journalism is at the moment, politicians can say whatever they want and get away with it. They make numerous statements that need some serious clarification and reporters either choose to ignore the comments or the situation has really exposed the low level of investigative reporting.
Was it not two weeks ago, during a press conference, that the leader of the Democratic Party mentioned that she knew of the Pearl of China project since about a year ago? Then why is the impression created as if Finance Minister Richard Gibson dropped a bombshell from nowhere? Is it not that a project of this magnitude would be discussed in the Council of Ministers meetings? If by chance the leader of the Democratic Party did not know of this initiative, would this not be an important matter for the Health Minister to discuss with her?
And, when the Minister of Health is asked about the issue, why would he say that he does not know much? If he needed to know more, his inquiries would have been handled in the meetings of the Council of Ministers. Something is not kosher. This development may have come as a shock to the majority of the people but it was floating around since a year ago. The question is: who is hiding the truth and why?
Today, the Port of St. Maarten has issued a press release, acknowledging its support for the Pearl of China project. Why is that, when the same venture is severely criticized by the opposition and their entourage? What is the hidden agenda? Is the ground-breaking ceremony an assurance to devise a scheme to connect to the project or is the opposition convinced that they will win the election and capitalize on the initiative?
Someone needs to come out and inform the public of the real reasons why patients are consistently delayed on St. Maarten and then suddenly shipped away for medical care. I know that this issue came to the floor of Parliament before but somehow the explanation does not make any sense. It is also a fact that the Health Minister travelled to Colombia to acquire first-hand information and did not find anything out of the ordinary. This is still a nagging and unsolved mystery. I believe that if he had disguised himself, the outcome would have been different.
Likewise, this excessive increased salary for security at the port is still unsettling. This matter was also brought to Parliament but the initial inquiry was met with significant apprehension. Why? Eventually, when the representatives of the Port finally made up their mind to go to Parliament, they played mind games with the parliamentarians, but especially the opposition. Then, when they couldn’t match the wit of their opponents, they went back to the drawing board and came up with some “Nancy Story,” to justify the increase. Surprisingly, the opposition settled for an explanation that made absolutely no sense.
How is it that no one is willing to tackle the origins of the amount of guns that are flooding the island and rapidly destroying the fabric of this society? What is it that the authorities are not telling the people and why are they so secretive about it? It has been said repeatedly, that lack of money is the major factor that is hampering the progress of Justice Ministry. Is it really, and why do the minister consistently stays away from the press briefings? Are we to believe the reasons given or is it that the truth is hidden somewhere in the rubble?
Joslyn Morton
Dear Editor,
When it comes to new properties on virgin land (like the China Pearl project), St. Maarten is a little like a card player in a tough position with very few cards to play to win the jackpot. Allowing “greenfield” properties, like that in the Belair area, to be used for new projects without commitments to infrastructure development is like the card player playing one of his last hands. Making the decision on when to play the last cards is a tough one and the difficulty of the decision easily underrated.
One of the easy solutions to keeping growth in the economy is to attract these sorts of projects. And it is possible that this is the critical moment to play that card. On the other hand the card is one of the last ones and it may be better to “pass.”
The better solution is to make sure that the country has more cards to play. Such cards would be created when we can effectively diversify or reduce the loss of existing diversifications. Such a card would be when we have sufficient public surpluses that we can stimulate the renewal of existing properties or drive new diversification by incentives.
Such a solution would be when our economy is operating so well and investors are getting returns at a level that we can choose the investors that bring the most value to the country. All solutions are likely to be better when the community has a greater level of trust that our hand is being played well.
Robbie Ferron
Dear Editor,
I do not usually react to comments made in connection with my letters, unless those comments are from an influential source. When I read about the numerous complaints the police still receive regularly for issues like illegal parking, disturbing loud music, businesses remaining open after the lawful closing hours, traffic backed up, just to name a few and as a consequence the police keep meetings with the wrong-doers, I reacted. I reacted because even though I dearly believe in dialogue (I usually to time to make sure that both parties understood what was going on) I believe more in order and consistency.
Then I read the Editorial Promoting Awareness and was confused. Which citizen has more rights, I asked myself. I expected the editor to comment on the fact that the police were not enforcing the law and that everybody has a right to a comfortable night rest and equal protection. Instead the editor took it upon himself to border on discrimination and decided that the authorities have better things to do than constantly run around dealing with these kinds of situations, etc.
Should it not have been so that the first time the police went to solve that problem, the consequences of non-compliance should have been made known to the wrong-doers? No meetings would be necessary if it was dealt with in the correct way the first time.
And even worse, to have follow-up meetings. If the business owners do not agree they have the Chamber of Commerce to complain by. They can take a lawyer and dispute the decision of the police, but it should never be so that the police have numerous complaints for the same situation from the same businesses and find themselves with their hands up in the air looking for a solution to abide by the behaviour of wrong-doers. A sign of weakness.
Besides that the Prosecutor's Office should have intervened in that already after reading those numerous complaints, because that is part of their duty also. The reason for the traffic been backed up to the traffic lights and Bush Road was also clear to everyone. A drunken driver loses his driver's license as soon as a report is made up against him for failing the drunken drivers’ test. There is no warning. Numerous complaints of different kinds and the wrong-doers are called to a meeting. Wrong approach.
I fully agree with the idea and goals of the Community police, but police do not make deals. Police enforce the law, sometimes by summons and more often by their presence, but they do not make deals. Especially not with constant wrong-doers to see how to get them to comply. The fact that follow-up meeting will be scheduled tells me that the police left the door open for the wrong-doers to continue.
Once more I applaud the work of the Community police but the actual police work must not get lost in the midst while neglecting the rights of others. Do not forget "zachte heelmeesters, maken stinkende wonden.” Promoting awareness is not keeping meetings with people who know better and do not do better. The police are not probation officers. Do you want to tell me that those wrong-doers hands are really tied?
Russell A. Simmons
Dear Editor,
It is the job of the Legislative Branch to conduct the checks and balances in dealing with the Executive Branch. In doing so, the coalition partners can be critical, but not at all times. After all, the Executive Branch is executing the governing program, backed by the coalition government.
On the other hand, one of the most important jobs of the Opposition in the Legislative Branch is to constantly question the Government in seeking clarity. This of course, is only possible, assuming that the Government remains answerable to the public at all times. The latter is of paramount importance for democracy to reach its full potential. A good opposition can point out serious issues, and debate them to get those resolved in the interest of the people.
According to scholars on the matters of government, the other major role of the opposition is to propose alternatives to what the government is doing, so the people get the benefit of political debate on different directions and alternative viewpoints.
The matter at hand in Statia, is that the Opposition attempted multiple times unsuccessfully to secure a debate on the precarious financial household of Statia, and the functioning of the Commissioner of Finance. In principle, this agenda point should not have any merit for the coalition government to go to the extent to filler bust this agenda point. Nine times boycotting the one and the same agenda point indicates that this ruling coalition is trampling on the trust bestowed upon them by the people.
There is a Financial Action Plan in place to be executed, and questions regarding the execution thereof seem to be the just thing to do. Democracy at the max. To just vote the agenda point off the agenda, not providing a quorum, or instruct the commissioners not to show up for the meeting, borders on child's play.
One can understand that it is an art to execute the power of the majority. One thing is sure and that is, if this solemn authority is used to stifle the Opposition, the ruling coalition failed miserably in that regard. The attitude of “might is right” is surely not in the interest of the coalition government. This only creates an unnecessary distrust and helps foment the growing perception among the public that the government has something to hide.
To those looking in from the outside, for example, The Hague, this childish behaviour is unbecoming for a Legislative Branch. There is also an indication of immaturity on the side of the coalition, and this surely will have ramifications. After all, no self-respecting entity will entrust a child with millions of development aid. This is a disgrace for the Island Council, a slap in the face of the people of Statia.
Being faced with these immature people’s representatives and knowing that these are the same persons knocking on the gates of The Hague seeking more autonomy, is a scary thought. If the premise for this autonomy is a proper financial household and a functioning administration, then these are surely not the persons qualified to deal with the future of Statia.
A government that shuns transparency and accountability, and gives "might is right" new meaning, is not a people's government, but one serving only its minions and own selfish agendas.
The UPC sincerely hopes that in the coming days the coalition partners will muster the ability to develop that little sense of responsibility, and also realize that they are doing themselves a disservice in the eyes of the community of Statia, and making our island the laughing stock of the Caribbean.
Elvin Henriquez
Deputy Leader
United People's Coalition
Dear Editor,
Wow! It has become unequivocally clear, that coalition governments do not work on St. Maarten. The unions are formed as a springboard to facilitate the thirsts of corrupt politicians and their entourage. Who could have thought that just before elections, MP Frans Richardson would be speaking this ill of the Finance Minister Richard Gibson? Is it not the same minister who the MP defended so fiercely, during the 2016 budget debate? Then how is it that all of a sudden, the minister is referred to as being too old to keep up with the times? This statement that the MP uses so conveniently will definitely come back to him.
The question is: in which category does he place the minister that he appointed and the individual who he supports to become the next director of the airport? More importantly, when he goes on the campaign trail hunting down the voters, does he bypass the ones who he considers to be too old to vote for him? Or, does he try to convince them that the US Party, under his leadership, is the only choice for this election? And, how does he integrate his party’s manifesto to suit the lives of these persons of a golden age?
It is time that the electorate wakes up and smells the coffee that is being brewed – the beverage that will give them severe diarrhoea, shortly after October 31. The moment has arrived for the people to use their discretion and scrutinize before they finalize.
As I mentioned in my article last Friday, these unprincipled politicians see you the people as nothing more than just a vote. This is the permission that they need from you to keep them in power – the control that politicians like MP Frans Richardson need to inform you later that you are too old to maintain a particular position.
Furthermore, people really need to pay attention to what is transpiring at the moment. If MP Frans Richardson is throwing rocks at the Finance Minister now, just to highlight his party, what do you think will happen in a few months should his party becomes part of the next government?
Besides, if he is one of the next coalition partners, do people really think that there will be easy sailing with his party? These renegade members of the US Party will dictate the direction of the country and if they cannot get their way, they will throw down the government again. People should never forget that MP Frans Richardson made it abundantly clear that he cannot help anyone from the opposition benches.
This election is the run for his cricket stadium and God only knows the desires of the remaining rabble-rousers that are on his team. Coalition governments have not functioned efficiently because of their infidelity, and to run this country has become much too costly. Therefore, the electorate has no other choice but to give a clear mandate to a one party slate!
Joslyn Morton
