I – After slavery days

1 – Modernization

From the 1830’s, the plantation economy began declining, because the workforce’s « productivity » diminished dramatically. The prospect of freedom accross the channel (Anguilla) had a strong impact on the enslaved (rebellious) attitude as well as on the attitude of slave owners. And I tend to believe that, long before the 1848 abolition, no kind of strict slavery rules could be implemented. That was the end of an era. We then went in a « go slow period ». The people that remained, mostly blacks, but some whites also, lived in quasi autarky. The construction of the Panama Canal, The Oil industry in Curaçao, the American dream were strong calls for men in search of opportunities to better the livelihoods of their families. I also believe that it is during that period that the cultural identity of the « one sin martin people » matured.

After a century of near lethargy, socio-economic conditions began to change more and more rapidly on the island, from the 1960’s onwards, and especially during the 1980’s.

Among the factors favoring this development there are (for the french side):

– the beginning of the electrification of the French side(1963)

– the installation of the first bank (Crédit Agricole, 1963)

– the seawater desalination plant (1965)

– the opening of the Grand-Case airport.

– The rapid development of tourism on the dutch side

A very sudden acceleration then occurs as a consequence of the overseas « defiscalization » law voted in Paris in 1986.

The social, cultural and economic landscape is considerably modified.

The most « visible » and impacting aspect is the demographic explosion.

Années	1931	1961	1967	1974	1982	1986 estim.	1988 estim.	1990
Populations	5377	4494	5061	6191	8092	12000	24000	28505

As a result, institutions have been overwhelmed by this demographic tsunami, with irreversible social consequences.

– The french National Education System has had difficulties and has been slow to begin to adapt to the quantity as well as the new qualities of the new school population;

– Social housing and other forms of accommodation have been sprouting up like mushrooms, but have provided a response that will prove inadequate. Communitarianism became visible and audible.

This has also resulted, for some years, in a certain animosity between the traditional population of the island and the different population groups from the Caribbean islands. This animosity is now tending to diminish, most « locals » finally accepting the long-term settlement of those whose main motivation for coming here was to survive and support the family that they left in their home countries, this more so that the children of the new settlers are integrating and being integrated.

The « older heads » would remember that many Sin martiners found themselves in a similar situation as migrants to other countries.

The relationship with the metropolitan community is often less serene, perhaps because that group occupies and seems to be making all efforts to maintain a predominant position in the economy and in the management of organizations, both public and private.

Huge amounts of moneys have been invested in the local economy thanks to tax exemptions, many companies were created, many buildings were constructed, many cars and boats inondated our environment. It was called economic development. But this development hardly benefited the better part of the indigenous population. Those who spoke French well and had some knowledge of the French administrative culture had a definite advantage in this context.

Therefore, this development did not produce social progress for most, and the problem of massive unemployment was never correctly solved.

2 – Institutional evolution

In his speech of July 14th 1990, the mayor (Albert Fleming) expresses his opposition to the installation of customs on the communal territory. An imminent installation was announced by the Prefect of Guadeloupe. The mayor expressed the fear that the tax and customs exemptions enjoyed by the « northern islands » would be called into question, which would further accentuate the economic imbalance between the two parts of the island, to the benefit of the southern part, which was not asking for so much.

Following strong popular protests, the Prefect of Guadeloupe was led to modify his project. The customs will be established in St. Martin, but will only deal with the fight against illegal trafficking (drugs, weapons …).

The association « Consensus Populaire Saint-Martinois » was born out of these events, and has conducted a systematic analysis of the structural handicaps from which the island suffered (education, health, immigration, judicial services, delinquency, cooperation, transport and traffic, …).

A broad political and socio-economic coalition was formed with the objective of obtaining a change of status, aiming to :

– Bring the decision-making process, located mainly in Guadeloupe, closer to the territory. (a concern carried mainly by the political staff)

– Preserve the historical social and fiscal gains (a concern of the socio-professionals in particular).

– Preserve the traditional identity of the island, language and other cultural aspects (concern of some politicians and cultural activists, grassroot, « born here » etc).

The events of 1990 were, however, only the culmination of a feeling that had been growing for a number of years, a feeling clearly expressed, for example, by Dr Petit (Mayor from 59 to 77), that the commune was being treated unfairly by the authorities in Guadeloupe, Prefecture, General Council and later the Regional Council.

Following the modification of the French Constitution and numerous exchanges between the Commune, the Department, the Region and the State, a popular consultation took place on December 7, 2003. The majority of voters who expressed their opinion opted for a change of status based on article 74 of the constitution.

The « Collectivité d’Outre Mer de Saint-Martin » and its institutions were inaugurated on July 15th 2007, and since then has exercised the competences transferred from the former commune of Saint-Martin, the competences exercised by the Department and by the Region of Guadeloupe as well as competences transferred by the State, such as taxation or transport.

The new status has not yet produced all the expected efficiency, for at least 3 reasons:

– the insufficient preparation of the administrative techno-structure necessary to take charge of the new competences. Neither the increase in the skills of municipal staff nor the recruitment of local managers has been well anticipated.

• The political instability linked to the « automatic resignation » of the first two presidents due to problems with campaign accounts.
• The weakness of the support expected from Paris (management of local taxation, catch-up plan, « miscalculated » allocations, etc.).

Senior officials at the central government level sometimes give the impression of patronizing overseas (and some distant provinces) governances. Wouldn’t these Jacobinists be trying to demonstrate that any attempt at decentralization is doomed to failure?

…and then there was Irma.

3 – Irma
It was less than 6 months since a new governance was in place, a team most of whom were inexperienced in public affairs management. They had to learn fast, through their first steps in the meetings of all kinds of commissions, through their pargicipation in meetings of the Territorial Council, through the calendar constraints linked to the preparation of a new school year, through the familiarization with the processes of preparing for the hurricane season, etc, etc. It was also necessary to ensure the useful visits with our friends from the south, who are much better organized in terms of protocol. And so many other aspects of public action that can only be mastered by practicing them.
In this context, it is easy to understand that the President, the only one on his team with experience of public responsibilities, is overwhelmed by the magnitude of the disaster, despite all the good will and courage of his colleagues. And it is true that it was a major disaster.
The State therefore came from Paris, as it is its duty of solidarity to do, to the rescue of a small devastated territory. But this State did not leave after the « state of emergency ». It took up all the space that local governance did not have the capacity to preserve. In any case, local arrogance was too far from being able to compete with central government arrogance. The solitary practice of local power was also a disadvantageous factor.

…and now there is this health crisis!

…and there is also this tense relationship between the local executives of Marigot and Great Bay and their respective central governments, which could have, should have provoked more solidarity between local governments. (for example, it is regrettable that a more aggressive common anti-covid19 communication strategy has not been put in place).

These are some of the circumstances that must be taken into account when preparing for the future.