Dear Editor,

In order to achieve the quality of education that requires our students to be successful, it behoves the Minister of Education Silveria Jacobs, to take a bird’s eye view of the current educational system. This means that the minister needs to put her vision on pause, and deal with the issues that are affecting the progress of students, teachers and administrators.

Right now, the minister is fighting a humongous battle, but until she really takes the time to dissect the problem, the quality of education will remain unchanged. In essence, when Minister Jacobs eliminates these obstacles that are causing this constant upheaval, then, the process to implement her vision will become much easier.

The Minister of Education has been out of the classroom for roughly 7 years. This time-span may seem very short, but there is a vast difference between now and then, with regard to the various degrees of behavioural challenges. Perhaps the minister should undertake the challenge of spending a week in the classroom as a teacher, to fully understand the reality of the situation. There are too many factors that are contributing to this negative change.

That is why there must be immediate action to identify these elements and purge the system. Teachers, who are the educators of the nation, cannot be overwhelmed with frustration every single day. The learning environment must be conducive to both students and teachers, in order for learning to take place.

Minister Jacobs is fully aware that the first step to learning is listening. If children can’t listen, how can they learn? Likewise, if children cannot behave, how can teachers teach as effective as they are required to? Therefore, I strongly believe that a lot more emphasis should have been placed on curbing behavioural problems at a much earlier stage. Sporadic workshops for teachers are totally inadequate; this should be an ongoing initiative. It is for this reason, why it demands an immediate input of the minister, to devise a plan to reduce this influx of students.

The budget that is being debated is such a perfect example of revealing to us, the consequences of failing to tackle the issues that have escalated to uncontrollable proportions. Just to further illustrate my point, look at the challenges that the country is faced with for being negligent in paying its debts. The saga of the government building, lack of early intervention to remedy the situation at the landfill and failure to treat all crimes as a priority, etc. These are just some of the problems that have come back to haunt us in a significant way.

What are the lessons of this failure? The messages are quite clear: They indicate that, “A stitch in time saves nine; if you fail to prepare, prepare to fail. If you think education is expensive, try ignorance.” Just like how government is paying heavily for taking a backseat on issues that could have been nipped in the bud from early, so shall it be with education. The minister is not envisioning the total effect of this negligence, but believe me, it will come back to haunt her real bad.

In the end, which does the minister prefer: that our teachers spend most of their time disciplining students, or imparting the knowledge that would enable them to compete in this evolving economy?

In closing, there is no doubt that the minister‘s portfolio, which includes Education, Youth Affairs, Culture and Sports, are extremely challenging. And, there is no denying that all four are intertwined. But, in order to counterbalance the remaining three segments of her portfolio, education must be on track, as it is the fountain that keeps the entire ministry in tack.

So, Minister Silveria Jacobs needs to be mindful that the success of her achieving the quality of education that she envisions, lies within this failure – the failure that gives her the opportunity to redesign and deliver an educational system that is superior in content, partnership and a stimulating environment.

Joslyn Morton

Dear Editor,

Showing thankfulness to others has minimally two outcomes. The person being appreciated feels encouraged to keep doing what they’re doing, and the person being thankful, increases seeing positive things to be thankful for.

As a parent, being appreciative towards our children, by celebrating their individuality strengthens them, makes them happy and improves their own view of themselves. Saying to your child that “I am happy to be your parent,” “You are so special,” “You know you are great at…” builds relationship and identity.

When you work for and work with others, showing appreciation to them for the (extra) effort being done by a team member increases the likelihood of there being more triumphs to celebrate together.

The gift of thankfulness is in my opinion, not valued in a proper light. Some think that it takes much to say “thank you,” and “you did a great job” in situations that aren’t mandatory. For instance proper protocol will be followed when a dignitary is in attendance at a function. The dignitaries in attendance will be welcomed and thanked for their work or support. Being appreciative by holding and speaking of others in high regard (intangible), showing gratitude in gift-giving (tangible) are honourable things to do. However, though honour is a part of being thankful, it shouldn’t just be left for those who are in office.

The gift of thankfulness is best unwrapped and enjoyed daily. We should not let one day go by without grasping how good we have it. And thereby be moved to say “Thank you” to the Divine, and to others we come in contact with.

Thank you,

Dairon I.E. Reijna

Dear Editor,

I do not usually comment on anything without doing research, but I rely on this source and decide to write to you about it. I was told that a prominent figure in the community reacted in a conversation by saying “Russell is going to have a field day with the news of those debating students.” I had mixed feelings when I heard that because there was a sense of satisfaction to know that I was right but still sad to know that certain people think that way.

The satisfaction came because it proved what was my opinion of certain people in the community, but sad because you expect those same people to be above that. Should I be surprised of the integrity problem?

Now this: I do not think in no way anyone should think that I am waiting for something to happen to give me an opportunity to write about it. For that matter I would be able to write a book about the things that happen, which are not so kosher. And I can openly state that I am respected for being the way I am. Maybe not well-liked by those who know who they are, but respected.

When the health control team made its findings at Maho, before the Minister of Health could be informed two other Ministers found themselves obliged to intervene because the inspection team had gotten out of hand. No, not because the place was pest infested, but because of the action of the inspection team, which was reported to be on camera (we have not seen it yet) and would be embarrassing to St. Maarten.

Ironically a large quantity of students got sick by that same Maho and only after that we are hearing that there were similar cases at other venues on the island. So which is more embarrassing now, the irresponsible action of the health inspection team or to find out in this way what is really happening, with all the ensuing consequences? Nothing is hidden nowadays anymore. Everybody has a camera and everybody has Internet, Facebook, and Twitter along with WhatsApp. There is breaking news all hours of the day.

The tourists prefer frankness than secrecy, especially when it has to do with their health. And contrary to what some of us want to portray, the majority of the tourists welcome controls. They feel more secure. I have seen the transition from not wanting controls to looking forward and expecting controls. So who are we harming most by claiming that it is not the unsanitary conditions at Maho? Say it like it is, take responsibility, clean it up and let’s move on. Have not we learned yet that damage control causes more damage to the original damage. If we had taken the bull by the horns from the onset the situation could have been limited to Maho. Now we find ourselves obliged to blame it on Noro-virus.

Where are those two Ministers on this now? Are they ready to say anything to Dr. Best and his team? This should happen, because it was the team’s behaviour that could cause embarrassment to the country, not the conditions at Maho. Again we have permitted self-interests to supply the Dutch with ammunition to attack our integrity. When I read “It’s unfortunate that these hard-working students fell ill during their stay in St. Maarten (he did not say at my hotel). We wish them a speedy recovery. “I got sick. Not ill, sick.

Russell A. Simmons

Dear Editor,

Donald Trump continues to surge in the polls, much to the chagrin of his rivals and those who are able to see what he is beyond his bombastic and bragging rantings. But he is vulnerable on two fronts neither of which had been asserted in the campaign. Some people believe his claim of being the best and most skilled negotiator in the business world is open to attack by the fact that many of his enterprises have gone bankrupt. What Trump would do is set up any new enterprise in a separate corporation and when it failed, he simply put that company into bankruptcy. Those profitable businesses he kept going. It is not clear how many enterprises he has handled in this way, but he obviously is not as infallible in his business as he likes to think.

But he is far more vulnerable with regard to another one of his sponsored enterprises, namely, the Trump University he set up in May of 2005. This was meant to be an adult-education program through which Trump would provide students, who signed up with Trump’s supposed expertise, his methods and secrets, with regard to real estate transactions. Trump himself was very active in developing promotional materials for potential students, claiming in them that he “handpicked the professors for the school”, and had met with many of them.

The school started out by inviting people to attend one-day get-acquainted sessions. Personal invitations from Trump were sent out. Efforts were made at these events to convince the attendees to enrol in a three-day workshop with a charge of $1,495 apiece, where the school’s “professors” would provide instructions on real estate techniques. It was claimed that they would be given “all you need to start getting rich”.

During the workshops, the instructors sought to enlist those attending to participate in mentorship programs with prices ranging from $25,000 for the gold program to $34,995 for the elite program. Supposedly, under these programs, the mentor would counsel and lead the student through actual transactions, using secret ideas Trump claimed to know. People who were anxious about their financial situations and aspiring to do better enlisted. A total of 7,611 individuals eventually signed up either for the workshops or the mentoring programs, many of whom were elderly. One an 84-year-old man from New Jersey signed up for the $34,995 program. When he withdrew from the program and asked for the return of his payment, he was refused.

None of the instructors was trained in education, let alone a professor. Most had backgrounds in sales. It did not take long for the participants to recognize how inadequate the instruction was. Many sought refunds and some who complained were given refunds, but many others were denied. Some mentors did locate properties for their mentees, but banks were not willing to advance loan money to acquire them, even though the promotional materials which Trump oversaw said bank financing would be obtained through Trump’s programs. Trump University operated from 2005 to 2010 when it went out of business. During that time it took in $40 million in fees and paid $5 million to Trump. Trump said he would donate his payment to a charity, but has not done so as of last November.

Eventually, those who were unable to recover the payments they had made banded together and retained attorneys. Two class action suits were filed on behalf of all the plaintiffs in the Federal Court in San Diego against Trump individually and the Trump University corporation alleging fraud and in one case racketeering under the Rico Act. Trump’s lawyers used every type of manoeuvre to stall the cases from going forward. But primarily they attempted to have the actions against Trump dismissed based upon the allegations that he did not own stock in Trump University, and had been completely “absent from the operations” of the school.

Plaintiffs’ attorneys were quick to point out that Trump’s materials stated that he owned the University “lock, stock and barrel” and that a separate corporation owned by Trump held title to the stock. The presiding judges refused to dismiss the actions against Trump. Last reports indicate those rulings still stand and the cases will be going to trial soon.

On November 5, 2015, Time magazine carried a seven-page article by Steven Brill, an established legal columnist in New York City, in which he described in detail how Trump developed the University and its promotional materials, how it operated thereafter, and the legal actions alleging fraud and racketeering against Trump, who by then was the leading Republican contender in the primaries.

Yet up until the Republican debate on February 25th, no other candidate brought this critical information to the attention of voters or the media. Maybe they had been fearful that Trump, as he so often threatens to do, would bring an action again them. That is exactly what he did when a former student filed a complaint against him with the Better Business Bureau, filing an action against her for slander. His action was dismissed by the Court in April 2015, however, and he was ordered to pay the defendant’s the legal fees she incurred, which is unusual for a court to do.

Finally Ted Cruz brought up the subject in the recent debate, although not very forcefully and without describing any of the evidence against him. Trump casually swatted the subject away, stating this was merely a “civil action that he could easily settle at any time he chose.” Now we will see if the media, which follow everything that Trump says and does, will follow up on this revelation.

The media might ask such questions as: What is the evidence against Trump supporting the fraud charge? When will there be trials at which Trump will have to testify and be cross examined? Has there ever been a contender for the presidency who has faced fraud and racketeering charges? Will his adherents continue to support him so strongly when they know about this? Can such a man be elected President?

But what about the old gentleman from New Jersey, who lost his $34.995 and was refused a refund? After all that, when asked by Steven Brill, he said he, being a self-proclaimed Tea Partier, would still vote for Donald Trump. Go figure!

Stephen A. Hopkins