National Alliance wants
answers on Laveist saga
PHILIPSBURG--National Alliance (NA) strongly believes the government of St. Maarten does not have a majority in the Island Council, because Island Councilman/“non-active” Commissioner Louie Laveist has never retracted his letter dated November 10 to Island Council Chairman Lt. Governor Franklyn Richards stating that he had withdrawn his support from the Democratic Party (DP) government.
Laveist has back-pedalled since that letter was booked in at General Affairs on November 12, re-pledging his support for DP by signing a support letter on November 16 saying he fully backs the present DP-led Executive Council, National Alliance leader William Marlin noted on Monday.
“By virtue of the first letter of Councilman Louie Laveist, the Government of St. Maarten had lost its majority support in the Island Council of St. Maarten. And as far as we are concerned, the Government of St. Maarten still does not have a majority support in the Island Council of St. Maarten. Why do we say that? Because the letter of Councilman Louie Laveist was never withdrawn,” Marlin said.
He sent a letter to Richards on Monday stating his party’s view that the island still had no government, and posed 18 questions specifically targeting the Laveist affair. NA had prepared several questions that were to have been asked in the meeting convened for last week Friday. The questions were submitted to Richards on Monday, requesting that they be answered in writing before the meeting was reconvened.
Laveist broke ranks with DP after he was stripped of his portfolios that included labour and culture during his nine-day detention on suspicion of forgery in October. He was not happy with the party policy that any elected member under investigation must resign from his or her post. He then declared publicly his support for NA and stated that he was not seeking any administrative position.
DP’s hold on government teetered in the balance, because it had the same number of seats, five, as NA. Laveist was a wildcard for either side to woo to gain control of the government. Eventually, after more than a week of political manoeuvring, DP persuaded Laveist to support its government once again. NA also had talks with Laveist.
Seeking clarity on the November 16 support letter, NA requested an urgent Island Council meeting last week and one was scheduled for Friday. However, neither Laveist nor any DP member showed up.
Instead, a letter signed by Commissioners Sarah Wescot-Williams, Theo Heyliger and Maria Buncamper-Molanus, Island Councilman Petrus “Leroy” de Weever and Laveist was sent to the Lt. Governor. It stated that DP and Laveist saw no reason for the meeting because the November 16 letter was clear.
Marlin condemned DP for not attending the meeting Friday. “If this blatant trampling on the rules of good governance continues it should be of no surprise to anyone if higher supervision is slapped on the Government of St. Maarten.”
It is not NA that failed to form a government, but rather the DP that has been failing to govern, Marlin added. “The DP won the last elections and had a majority in the Island Council, allowing them to form a government and govern. The National Alliance only got involved in discussions after the DP lost the support of the majority in the Island Council, which technically entailed that the DP Government fell on November 12.”
NA in its letter to Richards requested clarity on Laveist being stripped of his portfolios and also to his responsibility for the Census Office, being placed with the Lt. Governor.
“Did this really take place? When was that meeting held? Following the election of the Executive Council on July 2, 2007, the Executive Council met and distributed the portfolios in accordance with the Islands Resolution AB 2007 No. 21 of 2007. Has a new resolution been established to replace mentioned resolution No. 21 of 2007? If not, why not? Why has the Lt. Governor been given the responsibility for the Census Office and not a Commissioner as has always been the case?”
To make matters more complicated, Laveist, in one of his other letters received on November 12, informed the Lt. Governor of the Island Territory of St. Maarten that effective immediately he was taking a non-active position as member of the Executive Council.
“As far as we know, that is not possible given our constitutional make-up. You are either a member of the Executive Council or you are not,” the NA letter said. That the Commissioner was stripped of all his portfolios NA can understand, but that he wants to have a non-active position in the Executive Council needs to be clarified. “Did the Executive Council ever meet to discuss this letter? What is the position of the Executive Council on this letter?”
“We cannot have two Executive Councils at the same time. As far as we are concerned the Executive Council of St. Maarten consists of five members, including the so-called self-declared non-active member Commissioner Louie Laveist,” Marlin stated. “As far as we know, and from the documentation we have received up until today, Commissioner Louie Laveist never resigned since he was elected Commissioner on July 2, 2007.”
The fact that the five remaining members of the DP faction and Island Councilman Louie Laveist signed a letter declaring that they were in support of an Executive Council that does not include Commissioner Louie Laveist does not remove him from the Executive Council, NA said.
For Commissioner Louie Laveist to stop being a member of the Executive Council, he would either have to resign from the Executive Council, resign from the Island Council or be given a vote of no-confidence and subsequently be removed from his position by the Island Council of St. Maarten.
“None of the above has taken place, at the least not up until today! It is not about who is in government or not, it is about government doing things right; doing things in accordance with the law and in accordance with the principles of Good Governance,” the NA said.
Marlin added that the DP could have run on Friday last, but they could not hide forever. If they choose to show up again or not, they will have to answer the questions. “Playing political games is one thing, but playing with the future of St. Maarten is a totally different matter and will not be tolerated by the faction of the National Alliance. That a house divided cannot rule we have all realised by now. But a government put together on the basis of deals is even worse.”
He continued: “Enough is enough, and the DP Executive Council has to give account to the people of St. Maarten. The Executive Council is not the private playground of the DP, but one of our legal institutions established by law, and must therefore uphold the rule of law.”
