Unbiased look at the Sint Maarten Elections
Dear Editor,
They sometimes say that some things are better left without being said. This is my opinion about the article in which it is rumoured that Carl John is the candidate chosen to be chief of police. In that same article the reasons for not mentioning the names of the candidates is because the depth of the screening might uncover information that could make the candidate vulnerable to corruption etc.
I am saying this to say that by mentioning that name, that article is doing exactly what the article is saying is the reason for not mentioning names. My question then is: Are we ready to go out and make sure that in case Carl John is not chosen for the job, the reason is published in order to avoid any speculation of negativity on the part of Carl John for the reason why he was not chosen?
Because of my experience in the field, I can give umpteen reasons why and why not certain things are printed, but let us maintain a mature relationship and respect each other's territory.
By the way, can someone let us know what to do in case there is an accident in which someone's sight is impaired? I was told that our neighbouring islands are welcoming several of our overqualified professionals with open arms and that is why the average age of our proposed council of ministers is so high. Fernando Clark would have material for a complete show if he would hear all that is said concerning that.
One person said to me, "Any government is better that no government at all"; thinking that it was funny, but this is very serious business so let us keep it serious. When I read about the criteria for screening the chief of police, I asked myself why the candidate ministers should be making a fuss. So what should be the criteria for the Minister of Justice then or the Prime Minister?
I was hoping that Santa would bring us a new government for Christmas, but contrary to what was said in April, it seems that "we are not ready yet." And this is serious business!
Russell A. Simmons
