Sometimes the performance of our local governments is poor and we blame it on the system.
That is when you hear that neither Saint Martin nor Sint Maarten should have changed status. There are people who regret that we are no longer a commune of the department of Guadeloupe. There are people who are nostalgic of the former « Netherlands Antilles ».

As a reminder:
In July 2007, the municipality of Saint-Martin, the northern part of the island, became (at the same time as Saint-Barthélemy) an Overseas Collectivity, with important internal competences (regulatory powers previously exercised by the State in matters of taxation and transport, competences previously exercised by the Department and the Region (of Guadeloupe) for the care of young children, the elderly or disabled, for economic development policy, for the construction and maintenance of roads, secondary schools and high schools, to name but a few examples).

In October 2010, the Netherlands Antilles, an autonomous entity consisting of Curaçao, Sint-Maarten, Bonaire, Saba and Sint Eustatius, was dismembered and Sint-Maarten, the southern part of the island became, at the same time as Curaçao, a « country within the Kingdom » (of Holland), with a very large internal autonomy exercised by a local government. (Everything except foreign affairs, the army and nationality, and a supervisory rôle attributed to the Dutch government).

These changes came about as a result of democratic processes orchestrated by central (European) governments, upon proposals made by local political leaders, leaders who enjoyed the support of the local populations they had managed to mobilise.
These changes have been hard won.
It should also be remembered that this aspiration to have more decision-making power over local affairs did not come about spontaneously one day.
The process that led to the change of status of the French side lasted several decades before becoming a reality (with the imperfections that we know).
Already in 1970, Hubert PETIT, mayor of Saint-Martin, regretted not even being informed of the decisions taken in Guadeloupe, for his commune, by the Prefecture or the General Council.
In July 1990, Mayor Albert Fleming refused the conditions under which the presence of customs was imposed on his territory. The association « Saint-Martin’s people Consensus » was created in the wake of this refusal, with the mission of studying the obstacles to a smoother running of the territory and proposing possible changes.
In 2003, all the political organisations on the « french side » :
– Solidarité Saint-Martinoise with Albert Fleming and Daniel Gibbes among others
– USM with Louis-Constant Fléming and yours truly, among others.
– MAP with Louis Mussington and Alain Richardson
– Demain Saint-Martin with the late Jean-Luc Hamlet (RIP) and Christian Pujol
– Ensemble pour Saint Martin led by Guillaume Arnel
As well as socio-professional organisations such as :
FISM led by Raymond Helligar
ACASM led by Arnaud Vial
ADICASM led by Paul White
had joined forces to obtain a positive vote at the public consultation that took place on December 7th
A handful opposed any change but remained discret. Some, like Daniella Jeffry (RIP) regretted the limited scope of the change.
Previously, at the end of 2002, the « assises sur les libertés locales » organised by the government of France and conducted in Saint-Martin by Georges Gumbs, had raised the question of the choice between more decentralisation and a change of status. The second option was chosen.

It must be recognised that these changes in status have been accompanied, on both sides of the island, by much political instability:
On sin’martin north, two presidents were dismissed because of non-compliant campaign accounts, and replaced by a member of their list;
On sin’martin south, a phenomenon of « ship jumping » takes place, which brings down governments every 2 years or less.
It must also be acknowledged that the global economic crisis of 2008-2009, and more recently Hurricane Irma (2017) have taken their toll on island economies that are based almost exclusively on tourism.

It is in this context that the « disappointment » of some is expressed.
And very paradoxically, the same people who regret a change of status that gives more internal reponsibility, those that are nostalgic of « before the change », express a strong sense of belonging to a people, with an identity that belongs only to « their » compatriots, this « us » that is not everybody, and therefore this entity witch has a vocation to become a more autonomous nation.

Since 1946 and the artificial integration of the « French part » of Saint-Martin into the department of Guadeloupe, the Central Administrations have been trying constantly to merge us into Guadeloupe. The geographical and socio-economic reality went against this logic.

Since 1954 and the creation of the « Netherlands Antilles » the geographical and socio-economic situation made relations between the different parts of this entity more and more difficult.
Institutional change was inevitable… it was « le sens de notre histoire ».
Gaining more and more local responsibility because « the people » were becoming aware of their existence as a people and wanted to emancipate themselves from « parents » who were not always fair in the distribution of resources among children, especially those who were far away.
There are many examples of this « sens de l’histoire ».
Aruba had already achieved independence (status aparte) from the « nederlandse antillen ».
Anguilla had made its « revolution » and obtained separation from St. Kitts-Nevis.
And it is certainly the same spirit that led to the splitting of the Académie Antilles-Guyane into three (Guyane, Martinique and Guadeloupe) and the Université Antilles-Guyane into two (Guyane and Guadeloupe+Martinique).
This « sens de l’histoire » continues its course, even if the road is sometimes bumpy, despite the turbulences we encounter, whether the weather is good or bad. Human groups will identify themselves as a people and will want to emancipate themselves and engage in the nation building process.

I am therefore convinced that, in terms of governance,
You can’t go against the « sens de l’histoire.
We must use what we have, as best we can, and develop it as much as possible.
We must also make the people progress, without getting too far ahead of them.
……and we, elders, will have to make ourselves available to « our best young minds »…
just when they will want to create that future that will not erase our pasts.

I have no doubt that sooner or later, a year from now or 100 years from now, the Sin’Martiners of the north, the south and from all origins, will see circumstances, incidental or provoked, in which the interest of all the « people of the island » will outweigh the interest of each side, and the solidarity of the people will surpass government injunctions, and providential men and women will emerge to lead more harmonized governances and, who knows, maybe the next institutional leap,
because that is the « sens de notre histoire ».
Such is my opinion.