Clarifies Various Matters regarding Misinformation disseminated to the Public
Philipsburg:--- The Prime Minister of St. Maarten the Honorable Sarah Wescot-Williams was again the only Minister at the Council of Minister's Press briefing early on Wednesday. During the weekly press conference the PM again highlighted matters concerning the ongoing political developments facing St. Maarten, and stated that while it was not her intention to join the avalanche of press statements from various sources, she realizes that in the last couple of days misinformation pertaining to the Council of Ministers have been widely circulated. "As you know there is a confidentiality clause when it comes to matters and deliberations handled in the Council of Ministers and I believe it is important while respecting that to nevertheless put matters in the right perspective," stated the Prime Minister.
Responsibilities as Prime Minister
Wescot-Williams firstly discussed the question regarding whether or not a Prime Minister can call a Minister or Ministers to order. "People have asked me 'but can't you put your foot down with these Ministers?' Yes I can. However not to the extent that people believe that I can. Or I should be able to. We do not have a presidential system, a system where someone is in charge of appointing his or her Cabinet and then subsequently being in charge of that Cabinet. What do I do? I try to persuade, to talk to the Ministers. I can try to exercise good judgment, but at the end of the day it is about the individual Ministers' political responsibility to Parliament. One can then ask the other question on whether or not I not have any real powers as Prime Minister; of course I do and these are derived from my responsibility as Chairperson of the Council of Ministers. According to the Rules of Order I am the spokesperson of the Council of Ministers: I establish the Agenda, I can lift the Confidentiality Clause, I can bring matters to the Council of Minister that the relevant Minister has failed to table, I can decide who the Primary Minister is in a case, I decide on the rules if the Rules of Order do not provide for just to name a few. These are in addition to my own Ministerial responsibilities under which falls the upholding of the Democratic State, which falls under the Ministry of General Affairs. Thus I am responsible for the Internal Affairs of the Country," clarified the PM.
Takes Serious Incorrect letter Sent to Governor by Deputy Prime Minister.
"Having stated all of that I wanted to clarify a few issues in this context: one; and this is an item which has been widely publicized, that of the general Democratic Rules and Principles in a Parliamentary System is that if the Parliament expresses no confidence in one or more Ministers those Ministers have to tender his or her resignation: immediately. I am quite aware of the discussion that ensued after the letter of May 6th from a Majority from the Members of Parliament that they have no confidence in several Ministers of this Cabinet, and whether or not such a letter is sufficient for Ministers to draw their conclusion. Or whether or not one really needs an official meeting of Parliament to formalize that expression. That discussion is one for Parliament, however, the political reality is that eight Members of Parliament, a majority, have affixed their signature to that letter. That is the political reality. On the basis thereof I submitted, according to the rules of order, an advice to the Council of Ministers to be handled last week Tuesday and motivated that the members of the Cabinet make their position available. All necessary attachments where attached to the advice. I add this because last night I was asked by a member of the media about a draft letter by me that was not signed and the person wanted to know if it was authentic. I replied that it was indeed a draft letter, emphasizing on the word draft.
"As is now widely known as well some Ministers objected to making their positions available and decided that they want to table a proposal to dissolve Parliament. I explained to those tabling the proposal that that is not the way you deal with a matter in the Council of Ministers. The same Ministers then requested to have a meeting to discuss that matter of loosing Parliamentary support and that is there on paper; on Black and White. On Monday I took note of a letter, without even awaiting for Tuesday's ratification of the minutes of last week's Council of Minister's Meeting, by the Deputy Prime Minister to His Excellency the Governor referring to a decision of the Council of Ministers indicating that a decision was taken by the Majority of the Council of Ministers to dissolve Parliament, and seeking to have the minutes of last week read differently than they read on the basis that this was a decision taken on the proposal of the resignation instead of just a proposal. Any logically thinking person would ask; if that was the decision that was taken on Tuesday last why then call for a meeting to discuss for the dissolution of Parliament? Why then have an in writing request to call for a meeting dissolving Parliament. So that particular act by the Deputy Prime Minister I Take very seriously. The Prime Minister was, and is, in office; the Prime Minister had recorded the deliberations of Tuesday May 7th, and then, outside of that process a letter on behalf of the Prime Minister was sent to the Governor giving a totally different account of the proceedings of May 7th? That is a clear violation of the Rules of Order of the Council of Ministers; sending a letter on my behalf on something that was not discussed.
Council of Ministers has no Factions, only Parliament. Council of Ministers is supported by Parliament. No support, no Council of Ministers.
"That being the case after Tuesday's meeting I did direct a letter to the Governor explaining exactly what happened, what advice I proposed to the Council of Ministers, what transpired, what position was taken by the Council of Ministers, decisions which were recorded. I need you to realize that when it comes to the Council of Ministers there is no DP Minister; it is a cabinet of seven Ministers nominated and supported by the Parliament carrying out the business of the people. One is not a part of the Council of Ministers as a faction. That type of a situation is one of Parliament not in the Council of Ministers. We are a combination of a persons supported by Parliament conducting the business of the people. As I stated before I take the matter of the letter very seriously because it is a distortion of the facts. The records are there to prove this. There is no function of the Deputy Prime Minister. There is a function of Prime Minister, and in the absence of the Prime Minister the Deputy Prime Minister acts on behalf of the Prime Minister; that is the function. The authority vested in me has dictated how we have moved forward; that was the case last year and this is again the case this year. There is no faction in the Council of Ministers. So I duly informed the Governor of the fact that the Deputy Prime Minister sent a letter to the Governor on behalf of the Council of Ministers with a draft Decree. It is unfortunate that I have to go into details regarding a closed meeting of the Council of Ministers but I cannot allow half-truths to be out there and to not set the records straight. The rules of order of the Council of Ministers is a public Document that anyone can peruse.
Elections
"There is a lot of buzz in regarding elections; elections yes, elections no, elections this year, elections last year, elections next year. The issue at hand is not elections; elections are a consequence of a Constitutional Clause that states that Parliament can be dissolved by Government Decree. The same Clause states that if that happens, then elections must be written out and a new Parliament must be able to take seat within three months after the dissolution. The issue here is not elections but the dissolution of Parliament; when, how and by whom. The question is also who takes the initiative to dissolve Parliament and that is where things went haywire as far as the Council of Ministers are concerned. It is no secret how I feel regarding the Parliament and Government relying on that support and again whether we like the actors or not a majority in Parliament is a majority and I would like to repeat that the Confidence Clause Cannot be circumvented by going over to such a heavy instrument such as dissolving Parliament. Another Constitutional Clause is the fact that Parliaments are elected for four years and only in very extreme circumstances should any attempt be made to thwart that.
Ministers are at the Mercy of a Parliamentary Majority.
"Pertaining to elections I have heard two arguments coming from two different angles: the first coming from political parties or individuals who want elections. Again remember, for good or for bad the term of Parliament is four years and exceptions should be made in very very rare cases. The second argument that I have heard is that the system that elections produce is counter productive in that the people do not control what happens in the four years, who does or does not do what in those four years. The way it currently occurs is that there are elections which results in fifteen individuals being chosen and these individuals decide on the composition of Government; so the Composition of the Council of Ministers. These seven individuals who are proposed as Ministers can be taken from Parliament, can be taken from lists, from outside of Parliament or any political list. Cases in point: Sarah Wescot-Williams was an elected Parliamentarian, or an elected representative of the people; Minister Sylveria Jacobs was a Candidate on a Political List not elected and Minister Tuitt was a Candidate not elected nor was he on a Political List during the last elections. This shows that the Ministers can be taken from within Parliament Ministers who then they have to give up their seat; they can be someone who ran on a political list or never ran on a political list at all. So these Ministers are there at the mercy of the Parliamentary Majority. Politicians who have given up their seats in Parliament in order to become Ministers will surely push for elections, even if they end up out of Parliament or out of Government. Looking back at my political career I have faced many similar incidents including possible motions of no confidence; I never made it come to that because I drew my own conclusions but even to those that tabled the notions I stated that I would be back and back I was, for many years. So to a certain degree it is understandable that if you give up your position in Parliament to take on a Ministerial Position and then something happens in Parliament you are then at the mercy of your faction to get back in Parliament or otherwise you are on the outside. Considering this the desperate call for elections is normal. It must be a hard pill to follow for any politicians, however that is the system we have today and that is how it remains today and elections at this time will not change that; individuals being able once in Parliament to decide what they do, how they do it, where they go and where they do not go.
"The second call for elections are from some persons who are disgusted by the reality that you elect candidates for four years and for four years these representatives of Parliament and the persons they nominate as Ministers basically do as they please. Those that are clamoring for elections now will continue to play those musical chairs in Parliament.
Important Issues of the People Being Put Aside by Those Playing Politics.
"This Country has too many important and necessary issues facing us to be diverted by elections, elections that would give us a momentary adrenaline rush while nothing changes fundamentally unless we change the system, and that is the reality. Whether we have elections now or next year the results will remain the same; the possibility of those elected to Parliament to do what has happened recently will remain the same. The issues of the Budget, our economic development, preparations for the 2015 County Status Evaluation, Health and Pension Systems and tax reform are only a few of the items being held up instead of moving forward. Elections will only delay the attention given to these issues in the name of politics. We must therefore change the system," emphasized the Prime Minister.
From the Cabinet of the Prime Minister
