A call by the Central Bank of Curaçao and St. Maarten (CBCS) for the Parliament of St. Maarten to ratify the outline agreement resolving Ennia’s liquidity crisis before the August 19 snap election is not to be taken lightly. The two countries of the monetary union committed themselves to this arrangement pending approval of their respective legislatures.
While the latter was given in Curaçao since February 29, St. Maarten’s Parliament did not start handling the matter until June 27. That meeting was supposed to continue on July 19, but this did not happen due to the fatal shooting in which OMC leader Olivier Arrindell’s wife was killed and the focus turned to crime.
The URSM/DP/PFP/NOW coalition that took office after the January 11 elections expressed doubts about what the former NA/UP-led government had negotiated. Finance Minister Marinka Gumbs spoke of seeking a “better solution” but later clarified that it was up to the elected representatives.
According to CBCS, the moment is “fast approaching” when executing the solution will no longer be feasible. The insurance company’s restructuring must be completed by December 1.
Waiting until the next Parliament takes office on September 20 would be too late to start the implementation phase on time. Kicking the proverbial can down the road is thus not an option.
Objections heard include St. Maarten having only some 3,000 policyholders whose pensions are at risk compared to 27,000 in Curaçao. However, that difference is also reflected in the respective amounts both governments must pay annually for 30 years.
CBCS is to make payments for 50 years, but Curaçao is by far the financial sector supervisor’s biggest shareholder also in terms of dividends. To suggest the agreement is unbalanced would therefore be unfair.
Although the role of Mullet Bay is understandably a sensitive issue, the fact remains that the beloved property was granted to Hushang Ansary many years ago and has been put into Ennia as asset by him. An – at least partial – sale to offset the burden for taxpayers on both islands appears logical once a realistic value assessment is established.
However, stipulations can be made not only keeping the beach public as required by law, but to maintain the access road and parking space as well as the golf course and to honour current vendors. As stated before, simply rejecting the agreement without a viable alternative seems ill-advised.
