Dear Editor,
Do you remember when CaribServe first opened shop under Roy Richardson, a small entrepreneur who waded into a field of corporate giants like Telem and UTS when Internet was in its budding stages on the island? Despite their financial power, he was able to kick their butts and rose to be the premier internet provider on the island for as long as he was at the helm.
Sadly for company CaribServe those days of customer service and fair play appear to be gone, with their corporate takeover by UTS. As a result, people are leaving in droves to whoever else, because of slow speeds, a mere fraction of what they are purporting to provide.
What is worse is that management knows and is indifferent and unapologetic.
I tried getting them on the phone; a recording comes on declaring “Your call is important to us, some French and then perpetual ringing. I tried calling via UTS, the operator said she could patch me through, I was on hold for ten minutes when I finally gave up. Obviously the strategy seems to be to ignore all calls around the start of the month when people have to pay their subscription and problem solved.
For a company that claims to be “your no. 1 telecommunication provider” some communication would be nice.
Why I say it stinks, is because insiders tell me that the company is well aware of the problem for months now and is feverishly working to repair it, but in the meantime continues to charge high rates for sub standard service. Because here on Sint Maarten our options are limited, and will continue to be so because of ineffective (or should I say deliberate) government action and mutual back scratching. Such policy continues to prevent any real service provider competition that would reduce fees or improve service to bring us on par with the rest of the world.
The thing is, that while initial investment in companies such as this might be substantial, once set up, (which CaribServe has been for years) their running costs should be low; we are all basically paying for air time in cyberspace. With the exception of large salaries for management and huge dividend payback to investors, what else are ISPs really paying for? From the looks of things it certainly does not appear to be on network improvement.
In other countries their major hurdle is competition. But couple those attributes with a virtual monopoly of the wireless market, such as exists on Sint Maarten and you have a perfect storm against the consumer.
Despite this, I urge the management of CaribServe to do the right thing and follow the golden rule “Do unto others like you would have them do unto you” and not simply what “Thou can get away with”. Give your customers a rebate now until such time as you have resolved your issues. It’s the right thing to do!
Disappointed Customer
Name withheld at author's request.
Dear Editor,
After just over a year, MP De Weever has broken his silence on his reasons for becoming the ship jumper and ultimately placing St. Maarten in the political turmoil we now face; although having campaigned in 2014 on stability.
His position: "DP does not support local employment." Really? Fact of the matter is, the ordinance on foreign labour states that government can create a counterpart system, truth be told it does not state how.
So.. MP De Weever proposed his policy on the counterpart system on August 12, 2014, two weeks prior to election. Another political gimmick, during elections to play with the people's emotions.
In his policy he wanted to create a pilot project, because according to him, businesses were already on board. This policy was approved!! Because the policy was already approved when putting the governing program together by the NA, USP and DP, it was established, there was no need to put an already existing policy into the governing program. But yes, having a policy and actual implementation are indeed two different factors.
The irony in all this is after having leaped to join forces in greener pastures, one year later the same counterpart policy that has been in existence, and according to MP De Weever, the reason he was forced to leave the DP, has yet to be implemented.
So, I can only imagine that it was with a heavy heart, MP De Weever wrote in his article: "DP does not believe in local employment", and I quote: " I do hope that the new coalition and incoming Minister of Labour respects the will of the people and takes the time out to read the implementation guidelines to ensure that counterpart policy and legislation is enforced."
For the way I see it, that incoming minister is the real reason you, and those who were able to manoeuvre you, abandoned ship. I can't conclude without stating how utterly disrespectful your display to the Chair lady of Parliament was in the meeting of Thursday last, not only by questioning whether you should refer to her as such, but when things didn't go your way, had one of your temper tantrums.
Yet, I do understand why. You now have a point to prove as you are now allowed to play on the big boys’ playground; however, you should conduct yourself as an honourable MP, at least while on the floor of Parliament.
Marinka Gumbs
Dear Editor,
My attention has recently been brought to an article in the Penal Code (Title 28, Article 2:344).
I wonder if certain decisions made by members of the Gumbs Cabinet after they were the subjects of a vote of no confidence in Parliament, could open the possibility of those members being prosecuted personally? I read about the awarding of garbage contracts, I hear about political appointees and other temporary workers in various government jobs quickly being made permanent Public Servants, I again hear about a slew of Taxi and Bus licences being made ready for issuance, I hear about Government Long Lease Land about to be issued in a Trump-like "huge" hurry.
Irrespective of my well-known personal anti UP Party political views before and after the 2014 election, after the Gumbs Cabinet was put in place by Theo, I felt that with people like Marcel Gumbs, Dennis Richardson, Martin Hassink and Claret Connor in Ministerial positions, at least we would not have to worry about the absence of transparency, or the issue of integrity. According to me, at least these four Ministers out of a total of five and later a total of seven would carry the integrity torch high and not allow partisan hanky-panky to take place during the change of guard. Are they now proving me wrong?
Michael J. Ferrier
Dear Editor,
History and experience go hand in hand if one is willing to listen and learn from those who have had that experience. Which reminds me of the reason why one would say: “I told you so.”
At a very young age in school we were taught “verbeter de wereld, begin met jezelf” (if you want to better the world, you should begin with yourself). At home I told my mother what I had learned, but I did not know that my father who was a seaman was present. I told my mother if what I had learned was so then the teacher had to start with himself.
This was said because I could not deal with his cigarette smoke and I thought that the teacher was taking advantage because the children dared not tell him anything about his smoking. That is when my father came out of the bedroom and told me not to say anything to the teacher about his smoking in the classroom and that I should not even dare to tell him that if he wanted to better the world that he should begin with himself.
My mother gave me a letter to take to the teacher. He did not stop smoking during the lesson, but he stood by the door and blew the smoke outside. There was neither a confrontation with the teacher, nor parents going to the school to curse the teacher in front of the children. There were just a few words on a nicely folded piece of paper - not even in an envelope.
As I grew older and understood the importance of teachers in my life, Meneer Bruce is one which stands out in my mind, I came to appreciate them even more. No matter how much self-control one has, there is something in everybody’s life which gets at them.
I read in the paper that “education would work to curb the negative behaviour of our youngsters in a system where ‘teachers are capable to handle such situations' and where teachers are provided with the right tools."
The article goes on to mention that we know that Sint Maarten falls short of this department, in spite of the best efforts of those few teachers who are up to the task. Every time I read that kind of rhetoric which comes from a person who from the time I know him writing has always seen a half empty glass when it pertains to education and educators, “malicious” comes to mind.
I am asking myself if there is lingering trauma from school days. Then, what I stated at the beginning of this piece would be adequate personally and in general. Now, this when I read "I thought we would not have to worry" I said, I told you so. Emphasis on I.
If Mr. Ferrier could recall during my tenure in which we had our regular Monday morning staff meetings I made a joke saying that there is an article in 'Strafrecht' which could get them locked up. That topic was not part of the agenda, but something was said concerning the behaviour of certain individuals and I responded with that.
But I have stated it before and I will state it here again. If our MPs do not know where to find work, let them go back to the APK and APV (MP Janchie Leonard knows). Dust them off. The laws may sound antiquated, but all they need is a little adjusting to fit the times. Put them to work, inform our people about them and we do not need to be accused of being a lawless country.
If the MPs do this they can also have the relevant ministers’ departments carry out those updated laws in the correct manner. Do we really need experts and consultants from abroad, costing thousands of dollars to tell us what we already have? Give it to me for coining my ideas. I am not going anyplace, and my taxes will come out of it also.
No right thinking community can blame anyone for doing the right thing. If one goes back to the last interview MP Theo Heyliger had on Oral Gibbes live, when he was asked what he thought about the crime situation in the country, he could not get out of his words for whatever reason, but what he finally said made it appear as if he wished it would be possible to get retired policemen, because of their experience and knowledge of the country and its people.
But, he too is not doing anything for the safety of the community. Did anyone take the time to ask themselves why? Does anyone in law enforcement invite some of the young men on the 'block' to have a talk to find out what’s on their minds? If we continue to talk about the negative things that the 'youngsters' are doing, shouldn’t there be some kind of dialogue in which they can speak out and when necessary explain why things are done in a certain manner and not only in the way they think? Does it always have to be so that “what's in it for me” has to be a factor to get anything started?
We do not need the Jaycees, Kiwanis or Lions for that. There are conference rooms in the police station where these guys could have a mature conversation concerning the negative consequences of crime. The answer to “Why is it necessary to commit crime” should come out of these suggested meetings. We need the crimes to stop.
When are we going to consider this critical? Maybe I should suggest we get the homo movement behind this, they know how to get things done for themselves, or with the help of Holland.
I will repeat, if Holland is committed to send help for the judicial department, send authentic police people not Marechaussees. We do not have border disputes and let the marines take care of the waters.
Russell A. SIMMONS
Dear Editor,
Aristotle said: "The only way to avoid criticism is to say nothing, do nothing and be nothing." When some members of the DP criticize the counterpart law and policy without reviewing the implementation guidelines, then they are too quick to criticize and assume that "it’s a sure recipe for massive lay-offs." This once again proves that they were not in support of my vision to provide the much-needed opportunity of our youth to take on top positions in our community.
The success of any law and/or policy is how it is implemented. Hence the saying: "The proof is in the pudding." It must be understood that the counterpart law and policy was not designed to be used in every situation. During my tenure as minister of Labour, I signed more MOUs with businesses and formed more partnerships than ever before in the history of St. Maarten.
The Employability through Training Programme was just one initiative among many to decrease the unemployment and address the gaps between school and work and on-the-block and/or out-of-school and work. The counterpart issue cannot be seen in isolation since it is only a small part of the overall plan to getting our people hired, and to stay employed once the workers apply themselves.
The fact that some members of the DP criticize me is ok, because it reminds me that all I can do is my best, speak the truth, work as I told the voters I would continue to do, and surrender the rest. Their criticism is a supreme compliment to me and I will not give up. I will continue to pursue opportunities for our students, our experienced or inexperienced graduates, who deserve a fair chance to be employed and showcase themselves.
Aruba asked for Arubians to return home when they received separate status. What did St. Maarten do? I believe we cannot build St. Maarten without them- government should not be the only one employing our people, our students and our graduates. The private sector has an equal role to play, instead of requesting work permits when we have equally- qualified people. Government cannot afford to continue sending our students away and not expect a return on our investment.
Why have these students come back home to live in their parents’ house with a diploma and no job? This will only cause frustration and may lead to an exodus of them, and for some never to return. The counterpart principle is used for notaries and lawyers, "pairing" is being used by our police force and their Dutch colleagues. We can call it an apprentice program, but call a spade a spade.
The civil servants who have worked on the counterpart policy also believe that this is a great initiative which complements the most recent initiative by the Department of Labour Affairs "Start Here", and the inter-ministerial project "Brain Gain". I do hope that the new coalition and incoming minister for Labour respect the will of the people and take the time out to read the implementation guidelines to ensure that the counterpart policy and legislation is enforced.
Cornelius de Weever
