Dutch MPs say 2010 too early
~ Suggest higher supervision for St. Maarten ~
THE HAGUE--St. Maarten will not be ready to assume country status by 2010. The majority of factions in the Dutch Parliament seem convinced that St. Maarten won’t be able to comply with all conditions by that date. The December 15 Round Table Conference (RTC) was set as a deadline to hear whether it was “go” or “no-go” for St. Maarten.
Some of the critical remarks during Thursday’s Kingdom Relations budget debate came from the governing Christian Democrats CDA, the party of which State Secretary of Kingdom Relations Ank Bijleveld-Schouten is a member.
Coalition partners the labour party PvdA and the Christian Union (CU) also voiced their serious concerns about St. Maarten’s ability to become a country in the next few years.
CDA Member of Parliament (MP) Bas Jan van Bochove, supported by PvdA MP John Leerdam and Cynthia Ortega-Martijn of CU, tabled a motion that St. Maarten could only become a country within the Kingdom if it could guarantee proper maintenance of law and order and the judicial system was improved.
Leerdam said his party had “serious concerns” about St. Maarten. He mentioned the arrest of Commissioner Louie Laveist and said the Prosecutor’s Office in St. Maarten was doing a good job. But, he added, politicians also have to make a mental switch that integrity and good governance are essential in attaining more responsibility as a country.
Leerdam suggested placing St. Maarten under higher supervision, just as in the 1990s. This time, higher supervision would have to serve to protect the constitutional restructuring and prevent this process from being hampered.
Johan Remkes of the liberal democratic party VVD said he had made an analysis, based on the Final Accord of November 2006, of what had to be done by St. Maarten and what had been done so far. He mentioned the damaging WODC report on the crime situation on the island, the quality of the local Police Force, the problems surrounding integrity facing St. Maarten’s government and the island’s small scale.
Serious doubts
“I have serious doubts,” Remkes said on presenting a motion to hold off country status for St. Maarten for now. In his motion, he wanted Dutch Government to inform the partners on the other side of the ocean that it was not very probable that St. Maarten would acquire country status in the current planning. “It is too early for St. Maarten. A little child can see that it is impossible to realise a better Police Force before 2010. We should send a clear message here, today.”
Ronald van Raak of the Socialist Party (SP) said St. Maarten was a “small island with big problems and a bad government. If I listen to my colleagues, there will be no country status for St. Maarten for a while,” said Van Raak, who supported Remkes’ motion that country status for now was not really an option.
Ineke van Gent of the green party GroenLinks said it should be clear before the RTC in December whether St. Maarten would receive a go or no-go. “We need to have clarity soon. Is it responsible for St. Maarten to become country? Do they stick to the agreements? Is country status in the interest of the people? If the answers are yes, they have my blessing. If not, they will have to wait a bit more,” she said.
False hope
Van Raak of SP agreed there should be clarity about attainability, the sooner the better. “We have to make sure we don’t create false hope. I would hate to think that we are on a moving train, passing all stations, only to later find out that there is no way back. An RTC has a great symbolic value. Are we not creating false impressions?”
But Bijleveld-Schouten said the RTC would serve to look at the various organic laws, the Kingdom consensus laws and the constitutions of Country Curaçao and St. Maarten. “There will be no definite go or no-go at the RTC,” she said.
After this RTC, there would be other points in the process where partners will assess, she explained. She stressed that St. Maarten would not attain country status if it didn’t stick to all points in the Final Accord of 2006, an agreement to which she intended to stick. She agreed with the factions in Parliament that the situation in St. Maarten was “serious.”
Not fair
Alexander Pechtold of the democratic D66 party was the only MP who defended St. Maarten. He said the island needed a fair chance to complete the process and execute the agreements. He compared it to running a race and said you couldn’t change the rules along the way.
“You can’t tell the runner after 5K to stop running, because he would not make the 10K anyway,” he said. He pleaded for respect and understanding.
Pechtold laid on Willemstad part of the blame for St. Maarten’s problems with law and order. “The Justice problem is partly the fault of the Central Government. It is one of the reasons why St. Maarten wants to be on its own,” he said.
Pechtold agreed that if members of government violated the law, they had to be dealt with. “But you should not confuse that with the issue of constitutional restructuring,” he said. (Suzanne Koelega)
