Central in the ongoing stalemate regarding the third tranche loan negotiations is the assertion that the proposed Caribbean Reform Entity would infringe upon Curaçao's autonomy. But no one in the Curaçao government has offered a legitimate argument to support such a claim. Instead, political self-interest is blocking the path to the greater good – getting Curaçao's finances in order to further the wellbeing of the people and economy of Curaçao.
The Netherlands has no interest in recolonizing the island, as some have suggested. Rather, the CRE's financial oversight they insist upon is intended to ensure that Curaçao will not need yet more loans from the Netherlands after this third round of assistance. Keep in mind, Holland has its own infrastructure and society to maintain with its taxpayer funds.
Curaçao opted to distance itself from the Netherlands ten years ago, becoming an autonomous country. But now that the island is experiencing financial hardship, it wants Dutch aid unconditionally. The interest-free loans from the Netherlands are already a very generous response to the island's immediate need to weather a disruption of its commerce. Rarely does one receive something for nothing, and the current cabinet members should acknowledge as much and approve the loan terms.
The people of Curaçao understandably are keen to continue the nation's growth as an autonomous country within the Kingdom. But with autonomy comes responsibility, which can be severely tested in times of financial hardship. In these circumstances, individuals, businesses, and governments frequently seek outside assistance. There is no shame in asking for help. Indeed, it takes courage and strength to do so. Accepting this financial and administrative help does not jeopardize the island's freedom and autonomy whatsoever.
The CRE's central and critical purpose is to help Curaçao renovate its fiscal management to ensure the island's long-term financial independence and prosperity. Allowing the CRE to help in the long run actually moves Curaçao closer towards true autonomy rather than undermining it.
Gunsor Buther
Curaçao
Dear Editor,
The Dolphinarium is an enterprise that's doomed to fail. Dolphin poop would spread on our fragile coastline, turning the gold coast into the poop coast.
In an era where agriculture is animal torture, people are shellshocked and don't want to see them in captivity. The Madame Estate zoo closed. The Oyster Pond iguana pens closed.
Statistics are clear:
The following countries do not allow the display of cetaceans for
entertainment: Bolivia, Chile, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Hungary. States,
provinces, counties, and municipalities have done the same, including Barcelona, Spain; Malibu County, California, United States; Maui County, Hawaii, United States; Mexico City, Mexico; Ontario, Canada (orcas only, achieved through a trade and breeding ban); and South Carolina in the United States.
In May 2017, France issued a “decree” that banned the acquisition of more cetaceans for public display, banned the breeding of captive cetaceans, prohibited swimming with captive dolphins and other forms of interaction.
In August 2017, Mexico City banned captive dolphin display, which covered a dolphinarium within the city limits.
Hungary currently prohibits the import of cetaceans for public display and indeed has no dolphinaria.
The government of Jordan had issued a permit to developers wishing to build a dolphinarium (the country currently has no dolphinaria), but in response to public pressure, including a letter from the animal protection coalition Dolphinaria-Free Europe (M. Dodds, letter to Minister of Tourism and Antiquities Lina Anab, 30 July 2018), the permit was revoked.
The government of Antigua and Barbuda, after issuing a permit to a foreign company to capture as many as 12 dolphins annually from local waters, rescinded this permission after activists filed a lawsuit arguing the quota was unsustainable and that it violated regional conservation agreements. These include the city of Vodnjan, Croatia; the city of Virginia Beach, Virginia, United States; and the city of Denver, Colorado, United States. The government of Panama, after two years of debate and controversy, decided not only against the building of a dolphinarium, but also against allowing the capture of dolphins from its waters.
The United Kingdom used to have as many as 30 dolphinaria and now has none. Italy bans swimming wit dolphins encounters and other human-dolphin interactions.
Marine mammals can host a number of pathogens that pose risks to humans. A study of bottlenose dolphins off Florida, Texas, and North Carolina in the United States found 1,871 bacteria and yeast strains and 85 different species of microorganisms in fecal and blowhole samples, several of which were of potential pathogenic significance to humans (Buck et al., 2006).
Black Sea bottlenose dolphins carry antibodies (meaning they have been exposed to the associated pathogens) to morbillivirus, Toxoplasma, and Brucella (Russia IC, 2008). Brucella is common in cetaceans and is zoonotic (Van Bressem et al., 2009; Guzmán-Verri et al., 2012). There have been several incidences of humans being infected by marine mammal strains of Brucella, a bacterium that can cause symptoms ranging from fatigue and depression to joint pain, fever, spontaneous abortion in pregnant females, inflammation of the gonads in males, and even death.
Taken from https://www.projectsforwildlife.com/uploads/1/0/9/5/109512543/cammic_5th_edition_final_08mar19__1_.pdf
Catherine Brown
In The Daily Herald of today (Monday, September 7) was an article titled “Court orders govt. to issue long-lease water rights to Alegria Real Estate NV”. It mentions the plans to construct a breakwater and a sea aquarium at Burgeaux Bay, Beacon Hill. Well, this smells very fishy. Curaçao also started with a sea aquarium and, poof, suddenly they had dolphins swimming in circles. Curaçao is now infamous for their poor dolphins in captivity. But that is a whole different chapter.
We have had several investors interested in starting a dolphinarium here in SXM since 2000. They are not interested in the animals because if they were then they would also be fighting to keep them free. The entrepreneurs are only interested in investing money to make more money for themselves; their business is only about money.
Over the past 20 years, people all over the world have learned so much more about keeping dolphins in captivity. Many videos, books, documentaries, and Oscar-winning movies have educated us what the marine mammals in captivity have to endure. The dolphins are literally dying to entertain us.
We do not want the dolphins in captivity, we do not want to swim with them. What we wish is to have all animals in their natural habitat and in freedom. What is the added value of a sea aquarium? Nobody and no money can top what our creator created for us. We can only destroy nature and when it is destroyed it is done so forever.
It is not normal to have dolphins on one and the same spot daily. These animals are huge and eat huge amounts of food. Each dolphin creates a whole lot of waste several times a day. Would you like to swim in their waste? The accumulated waste has to go somewhere so it goes downstream along the coast. In Mexico they have done many tests on the water quality because of all that waste creating algae problems that keep on growing on the fences. Cleaning the fences makes it all worse and spreads the algae. The concentration of waste will create problems along the coastline and also swimmers downstream, as far as Long Bay, can eventually get skin problems.
Up ’til now there has never been a tourist who said not to come back because St. Maarten has no dolphinarium. To the contrary, many people are ready to give up this destination if we are so cruel to put animals in captivity. There is nothing positive to learn from animals in captivity.
What we humans should learn from animals is to accept life as is and make the best of it.
Tourists are aware of the plans here in St. Maarten and are already protesting the Alegria plans. Mind you, these are tourists not living here but purely love the island as is. They are contacting Dolphin Defenders SXM and asking how to help keep the dolphins in freedom. We do not need a dolphinarium and neither do we need a Sea Aquarium. What the island needs is respect for nature and other life forms. The tourists and locals are willing to continue to protest ’til we are convinced 100 per cent that there will be no dolphinarium on St. Maarten.
Dolphin Defenders SXM has previously suggested legislation which would finally prohibit these developments in the future and keep marine mammals in their wild habitat. We urge government and parliament to discuss the proposal and would be happy to resubmit to you if needed.
Dolphin Defenders has been writing to Alegria before the COVID-19 lockdown and we were brushed off with an intimidating letter that we should approach their lawyer.
We urge you, Minister L. De Weever, to please stop any plans for a dolphinarium and for a Sea Aquarium, plus to make sure and confirm that our government really, really knows who they are planning to deal with and which people the so-called “specialists or professionals” this Alegria NV will get into SXM to set up this whole cruel project. Before you know it, this island is sold and there is no way back.
Dolphin Defenders SXM
Mercedes De Windt
Dear Editor,
Including in my daily prayers is a prayer for the youth.
Part of that prayer is may they grow in grace and in the power of Your Holy Spirit. Help them to develop their skills to Your honor and glory. May they follow wise council, good leadership, inspiring company and Godly discipline, so that they may take their place in life and be a blessing to the community in which they live.
I read the article of the President of Parliament award and that was rewarding to me. For there to be a winner there has to be more participants. So along with Erwin Romney I would like to congratulate all the nominees and may they continue to strive for excellence.
Russell A. Simmons
Dear editor,
Please let me express the facts how I see this issue and how it can be resolved.
I am only stating on the accusations I saw on social media, cannot say surely it is true. I saw people of French nationality or their children being refused entry to continue on to Marigot.
Legally that cannot or should not be, you cannot stop or hold legal citizens that did not commit any crime to continue traveling within his country of citizenship.
If that is true the local government will be a fool to allow it and not fight for the native people to defend them in a democratic republic as France. People are being stopped not at the border, they are being stop in French St. Martin. Legally that issue is a legal matter of French St. Martin.
A prefect (French: préfet) in France is the state's representative in a department or region. Subprefects (French: sous-préfets) are responsible for the subdivisions of departments, arrondissements. The office of a prefect is known as a prefecture. The prefecture is an administration that belongs to the Ministry of the Interior, and is therefore in charge of the delivery of identity cards, driving licenses, passports, residency and work permits for foreigners, vehicle registration, registration of associations (creation, status modification, dissolution), and of the management of the police and firefighters.
The local government can take the prefecture to courts if the citizens of that territory rights are violated. So, the shame is also on the Collectivité not to stand up for their French St. Martin grassroots people. Every citizen of France has a legal right to carry the government to courts. France is a democratic republic; failure to do so is the citizens’ fault and Collectivité not helping the local French residents to pursue their democratic right as a French citizens.
According to my understanding the préfet established Coronavirus Travel Restrictions. Legally the Dutch side and the French St. Martin is obstructing or violating that coronavirus restrictions. How can French citizens come from France, pass through Dutch side to enter French St. Martin without restrictions and other French local citizens are being harassed and stopped, obstructing their free movement to French St. Martin? That is discrimination.
What law did the local French citizens living on the Dutch side break that he or she is being harassed while the European French citizens are being allowed without being harassed?
Natural law is a body of unchanging moral principles regarded as a basis for all human conduct and rights. The Dutch-side government of St. Maarten is also guilty of allowing French St. Martin government to discriminate against other French citizens (Black people) allowing them to abuse the local French citizens while allowing the European French citizens (white people) to come from Dutch side and travel freely without being harassed to French St. Martin. A law for all French citizens be it black or white should have the same rights to access reciprocal through both sides of the island. A government on any side knowingly allowing their side to favour people of same citizens but different colour is just as guilty. Foolishly and shamefully because the Dutch-side government is too weak to defend human rights for all people, they are asking Holland to do what they fail to do.
Shameful as it is, the prefecture is defending her European people, the collectivité does not have power to stop the prefecture but they have the right to carry the prefecture to courts on French St. Martin for ground of discrimination, shame on them. Shame on the Dutch government for allowing the prefecture to use Dutch St. Maarten to discriminate against other European citizens because of their colour skin, you are just as evil for allowing that. The conclusion is, if my grassroots St. Maarten/St. Martin border is not good to let my St. Maarten people pass, then both sides should close the border.
I am the Patriot Miguel Arrindell and I approve this message.
The Patriot Miguel Arrindell
