Dear Editor,
Recent comments made by Prime Minister William Marlin should be of great concern to all who care about Democracy in the freedom to show their colours and to express themselves anytime and anywhere. The Prime Minister’s “War on Democracy” continues as he plans on using Electoral Reform to erase some of the rights of St. Maarten voters and their freedom to express their political affiliation when walking into the polling station to vote.
Wearing a political T-shirt should not disrupt the rights of a voter from exercising his/her democratic choice to vote on Election Day. Failure to show proper identification, failure to present a voting card, or gross misconduct should be the only reasons that could prevent a St. Maarten voter from casting his/her vote. The idea that it is illegal to wear a party-shirt is absolutely outrageous, and is another direct attempt to bring an end to Democracy and everyone’s right to freely show who they support.
Yes, we need Electoral Reform, but let’s face facts, wearing political T-shirts on Election Day is not the problem. The problem is politicians like the Prime Minister, who brought home a terribly written Constitution and now wants the privilege to continue destroying the little good that we have left.
Having high hopes that the public will fail to remember just who came from the Netherlands, made a major speech as leader of Government at the Administration Building and made sure to remind everyone as to who was actually responsible for bringing home 10/10/10 during the 2010 Elections sure indicates a sense of insecurity. If the voters had only known what was coming and the mess that had been brought home from the Netherlands, the election results that year would have been much different and not favourable for the then winning party.
Despite all the different political views on Sint Maarten, we have never seen an act of violence in connection with the diversity of political views, a blessing that we should be thankful for. What reason is there to prevent people from casting their vote if they decide to wear a certain political T-shirt? Sir, you are looking for a problem where it does not exist.
By Election Day, the majority of voters have already made up their minds, whether or not they are going to the polls and vote for the party and candidate they support. If by that time you, Mr. Prime Minister, feel insecure on the votes you will receive at the polls, and somehow feel threatened by a voter wearing a political T-shirt, then you have managed a bad campaign and probably an even worse government.
The world has had its share of regimes run by the likes of Saddam Hussein and Idi Amin, where expressing yourself freely would have gotten you jailed, punished, or even executed. We may have a lot of problems on St. Maarten, but let’s not follow the white line that our Prime Minister wants to lead us down to, where wearing a political T-shirt when going to vote is an illegal act.
Let us instead head up the road where it is illegal for a Member of Parliament, convicted by the court to be involved in the country’s decision-making process, while at the same time collecting a massive pay check paid for by law abiding citizens.
Knowledge has failed, it is time we seek wisdom and make things right.
Armand Meda
Dear Editor,
The effort of our prime minister to give relief to senior citizens is appreciated. However, the focus on electricity cost is, according to me, misplaced. We now pay for electricity the same as in July 2007. Where the focus should be is on food. Based on the figures from our Department of Statistics the total inflation from 2005 till October 2015 is 30 per cent. Taking the inflation in food prices separate the number is exactly 100 per cent. In other words on average one has to spend 30 per cent more now to pay for the same as in 2005, but for food one has to pay double.
On the average, inflation category housing is represented at 40 per cent while food is represented at 10 per cent. My assumption is that seniors spend far more on food than on housing. I don’t know what the answer is, except raising the AOV much more than the 0.86 per cent as has been done for 2016. If our prime minister finds a way to lower the food prices that would be the most effective relief for seniors.
The spreadsheet shown below is based on information from the Department of Statitics.
| Average | Food | |||
| Inflation | Inflation | |||
| 2005 | 100.00 | 100.00 | ||
| 2006 | 2.30% | 102.30 | 3.90% | 103.90 |
| 2007 | 2.30% | 104.65 | 2.70% | 106.71 |
| 2008 | 4.60% | 109.47 | 13.70% | 121.32 |
| 2009 | 0.70% | 110.23 | 9.30% | 132.61 |
| 2010 | 3.20% | 113.76 | 3.00% | 136.59 |
| 2011 | 4.60% | 118.99 | 9.10% | 149.01 |
| 2012 | 4.00% | 123.75 | 11.40% | 166.00 |
| 2013 | 2.50% | 126.85 | 6.30% | 176.46 |
| 2014 | 1.90% | 129.26 | 6.30% | 187.58 |
| 2015 | 0.60% | 130.03 | 7.10% | 200.90 |
Kind regards,
Alfred Koolen
Dear Editor,
It is with great pleasure that I read in your newspaper of January 7, that Prime Minister William Marlin said that Government will be looking into the possibility of allowing St. Maarten students pursuing studies in the Netherlands to vote in the upcoming election in September. Especially so, because I championed this constitutional right of our citizens residing overseas since 2013.
It would have been nice to receive support for it then, especially when all the arguments word for word, used by the honourable Prime Minister were used by me in 2013, when I first had my article on this issue published in your newspaper. A year after my first article on this issue, the then honourable Member of Parliament Mrs. Gracita Arrindell championed the cause in an article she had published in your newspaper, after which, I published a second article on this same topic.
The difference between the championing of the cause by Mrs. Arrindell and PM, William Marlin versus mine, is that I did not exclude other citizens of this country merely because they do not reside here any longer. After all, this is the constitutional right all Dutch citizens born in the Netherlands have no matter where they reside within or out of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. Are we to discriminate against and refuse this democratic right to our citizens just because they choose to live overseas like the sister of our Prime Minister did?
My son also choose to live overseas. His reason was that the subject he studied for does not provide work opportunities for him here yet. However, if this opportunity for work never presents itself does this mean that he might not want to come back in his old age and enjoy his pension here? After all, I was born in Curaçao but spend the majority of my life (40 years) on St. Maarten, building a future for him and his sister to benefit from. It is their inheritance and the only place they call their country.
My son, who by the way was born here, speaks of Canada as his second home; second is the key word here. On top of that, they look forward every year to come here on vacation and spend time with their loved ones and friends whom for the greater majority are citizens of this country. Am I to believe that they may not have a say in how this country is run? Did we ever stop to consider that when someone made a choice to live overseas it might be because of lack of opportunities back home and greener pastures elsewhere?
We are a tolerating country that permits over 114 citizens of other countries to call St. Maarten their home, all in search of greener pastures. They number thousands. They get a passport and with it, the right to vote. Yet our own are discriminated against and are told you made a choice to live overseas. Shame on those of us for thinking so little of our own. Think of all the non-purchased votes, the educated votes and the want my country to one day be a place with a government to be proud of, votes we are denying by excluding all born-here citizens residing overseas, the right to cast their votes.
If it can be done for a selective group, then it can be done for all citizens of this country. Yes, we should start with Holland, but not start with students only. I too hope. Only I hope that we one day, sooner than later, will not look down on our own but rather lift them up as part of “we” that they are.
Louis Rudy Engel
Dear Editor,
Well wishes and upon receipt of this email may all be well with you and yours. Unfortunately, due to the Caravanserai Resort debacle, my wife and I no longer make a yearly and sometimes twice-yearly vacation on the beautiful island of St. Maarten. My wife had even put away all items purchased on the island, including Christmas decorations in order to not be reminded of the thousands of dollars lost in our timeshare.
Why has consumer protection not been enacted so that others don’t face this problem in the future? The loss of restaurants, car rentals and other merchants and tourist attractions will be greatly affected by this lack of will in government action. It may be too late for us, but it’s a black eye on the island and the word is spreading.
Here is hoping that 2016 will bring the reform that is needed to protect time-share owners.
H. Hernandez
Dear Editor,
I took the liberty to read Prime Minister Marlin’s New Year’s address and needless to say, I am delighted that he has finally left the BBQ gambling pit and only now realizing what is going on in Sint Maarten, yet missing what has really happened in his absence.
Prime Minister Marlin stated that he wants to open a help desk for the elderly, but little does he know or was not informed by Minister Lee, that former Minister De Weever already opened one. In addition, it also included the physically challenged.
Secondly, he mentioned the Employment Fund which he still needs to figure out, but he should review the Employability through Training Programme which was started and executed by Minister De Weever and then mainstreamed into the regular work of Labour and Social Affairs.
Young and unemployed people need to be registered, assessed, upgraded, matched with an appropriate participating business and trained before being employed short-term, and hopefully when those persons apply themselves on the job, they can be hired permanently.
Financial and medical assistance has and can be provided to them during this period to assist them. The laws are already there and the process is also in place, so I doubt that in less than nine months anything will be done except making empty promises again.
Prime Minister Marlin claims that his Employment Fund will address the nagging unemployment issue, which he assured has increased. I am kindly asking the good Prime Minister to check his facts, because during my tenure unemployment actually decreased and it is documented even in the census report.
Instead of just being critical, it is more important to be honest and acknowledge what has been done. Even the media are critical at times and they too need to question what politicians are saying. After all, they printed the stories of the opening of the Boasman help desk for the elderly and physically challenged, Employability through Training along with the unemployment figures.
We should all constantly be looking for ways to improve, educate and become more efficient and objective, instead of gambling with Sint Maarten’s future.
Independent Member of Parliament
Cornelius de Weever
