MP Sjamira Roseburg Knowing our value - St. Maarten's path forward

𝐄𝐝𝐢𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐥𝐚𝐢𝐦𝐞𝐫: 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘗𝘳𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘔𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳’𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘢𝘳𝘬𝘴 𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘎𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘰𝘳’𝘴 𝘚𝘺𝘮𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘪𝘶𝘮 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘢𝘨𝘢𝘪𝘯 𝘥𝘶𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘭𝘢𝘴𝘵 𝘸𝘦𝘦𝘬'𝘴 𝘭𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘋𝘊𝘖𝘔𝘔 𝘗𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴 𝘉𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘧𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘴𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘬𝘦𝘥 𝘱𝘶𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘤 𝘥𝘦𝘣𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘢𝘣𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘚𝘵. 𝘔𝘢𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘦𝘯’𝘴 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘧𝘶𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘺’𝘴 𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘒𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘥𝘰𝘮 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘕𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘴. 𝘎𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘪𝘴𝘴𝘶𝘦𝘴 𝘳𝘢𝘪𝘴𝘦𝘥, 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘗𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦’𝘴 𝘛𝘳𝘪𝘣𝘶𝘯𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘤𝘩𝘦𝘥 𝘰𝘶𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘔𝘦𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘗𝘢𝘳𝘭𝘪𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘷𝘪𝘦𝘸𝘴 𝘰𝘯 𝘴𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘭 𝘬𝘦𝘺 𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴: 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘗𝘳𝘪𝘮𝘦 𝘔𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘳’𝘴 𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘣𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘥 𝘢𝘴 𝘢 𝘧𝘶𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘵𝘶𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘰𝘱𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯, 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘢 “𝘴𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘥 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦” 𝘢𝘵 𝘢 𝘤𝘭𝘰𝘴𝘦𝘳 𝘳𝘦𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘩𝘪𝘱 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘕𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘴, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘥𝘦𝘴𝘤𝘳𝘪𝘱𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘧 𝘚𝘵. 𝘔𝘢𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘦𝘯’𝘴 𝘤𝘶𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘨𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘴 “𝘢𝘯 𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘷𝘦 𝘪𝘭𝘭𝘶𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯.” 𝘔𝘗𝘴 𝘸𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘭𝘴𝘰 𝘢𝘴𝘬𝘦𝘥 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘢𝘪𝘯 𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘯 𝘵𝘰 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘤𝘶𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘨, 𝘪𝘯 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘮𝘪𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘦, 𝘔𝘗 𝘈𝘳𝘥𝘸𝘦𝘭𝘭 𝘐𝘳𝘪𝘰𝘯’𝘴 𝘮𝘰𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘢 𝘳𝘦𝘧𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘶𝘮, 𝘰𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘣𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘸𝘢𝘳𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘨𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘳 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘭𝘪𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘺 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘤𝘦𝘥𝘶𝘳𝘦.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐰𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐬 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐌𝐏 𝐒𝐣𝐚𝐦𝐢𝐫𝐚 𝐑𝐨𝐬𝐞𝐛𝐮𝐫𝐠. 𝐇𝐞𝐫 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐩𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐝𝐝𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐱𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐨𝐟 𝐒𝐭. 𝐌𝐚𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐞𝐧’𝐬 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐭𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐟𝐮𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐨𝐥𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐥𝐢𝐚𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐩𝐬 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐦𝐨𝐯𝐞 𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐰𝐚𝐫𝐝 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐩𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐛𝐥𝐲. 𝐒𝐡𝐞 𝐦𝐚𝐝𝐞 𝐢𝐭 𝐜𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐚 𝐭𝐨𝐩𝐢𝐜 𝐬𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞𝐬 𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐨𝐮𝐬𝐥𝐲 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐣𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐫𝐨𝐥𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐬 𝐌𝐞𝐦𝐛𝐞𝐫 𝐨𝐟 𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐥𝐢𝐚𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐂𝐡𝐚𝐢𝐫 𝐨𝐟 𝐂𝐊𝐀𝐈𝐑 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐂𝐂𝐀𝐃, 𝐛𝐮𝐭 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 "𝐈 𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐯𝐞 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐲𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐬𝐢𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐨𝐧 𝐬𝐮𝐜𝐡 𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐚𝐧 𝐨𝐩𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧. 𝐈 𝐚𝐦 𝐨𝐩𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐨 𝐝𝐢𝐚𝐥𝐨𝐠𝐮𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐜𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐪𝐮𝐞, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐈 𝐡𝐨𝐩𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐩𝐢𝐞𝐜𝐞 𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐚𝐠𝐞𝐬 𝐢𝐧𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐦𝐞𝐝 𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐜𝐮𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐚𝐦𝐨𝐧𝐠 𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐩𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞."

As Member of Parliament, Chair of CKAIR and CCAD, and being a lawyer, I give extra attention to St. Maarten’s constitutional future, ensuring we take informed steps to benefit our people.

The subject of independence and, more broadly, the constitutional future of Sint Maarten strikes at the heart of our national identity and the vision we hold for our children and grandchildren. Every community should aspire toward self-determination: the ability to govern ourselves, to provide for our people, to stand on our own. Yet, aspiration must be anchored in realism and clarity.

At this juncture, I believe Sint Maarten is not yet ready for independence, and I believe that if a referendum were held today, it would reflect that readiness has not yet been fully achieved. But let me be clear: “not yet ready” does not mean “never ready.” Readiness begins with awareness, preparation, and laying the foundation for a durable nation-state.

Regional bodies such as CARICOM remind us that independence is a process, not a single event. Even countries like Barbados and Jamaica required years of staged preparation and institution-building before successfully achieving independence in the 1960s. Sint Maarten has had autonomy since 2010, but we still face structural, economic, and social challenges that must be addressed before considering independence.

𝐖𝐞 𝐌𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐡𝐢𝐩

When engaging with the Kingdom of the Netherlands, it is essential that we make clear how St. Maarten expects to be communicated to and treated. Once the counterparty understands that, they will have to adjust naturally. This is not about confrontation, but about asserting our value and ensuring mutual respect. St. Maarten will no longer accept being treated as a subordinate by default. We will insist on reciprocity, fairness, and equal partnership.

Some may not agree with me when I say independence at this moment is not realistic. There are voices that suggest we should simply go independent and that we would survive. But the reality is more complex. Independence requires strong institutions, social cohesion, and economic sustainability. It is not enough to say “go independent and succeed”; we must prepare carefully, educate our people, and build a foundation that ensures lasting success.

Being born in the Netherlands gives me a unique perspective. I understand how the Dutch think and negotiate, and I know the system is designed to benefit both sides strategically, not out of generosity. Sint Maarten must therefore know its value, assert its power, and ensure that the Kingdom Charter is applied fully and interpreted in ways that truly reflect equality.

In particular, Article 43 must be read as one complete article, not as separate sections. It is often interpreted in practice as if the Netherlands acts as a savior, but that is not its intent. Instead, the article should be understood as a framework for collaboration, mutual responsibility, and equal partnership across the Kingdom.

𝐖𝐞 𝐖𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐍𝐨𝐭 𝐁𝐞 𝐒𝐞𝐭 𝐔𝐩 𝐭𝐨 𝐅𝐚𝐢𝐥

We will not proceed with a constitutional change that sets us on the path to failure. Our debt burden of approximately NAf 1.42 billion, about 46 percent of GDP according to the College financieel toezicht (Cft), reminds us of the work still ahead.

We owe it to our ancestors and to the next generation to build from strength. Part of that means utilizing the slavery-reparations fund that we are entitled to. But let me be clear: this fund is not sufficient and not a cure-all. Four hundred years of slavery cannot be compensated by any sum of money. Still, it can and must be used as a starting point, an opportunity to invest in our people, to rebuild what was stripped away, and to create the foundation for true nationhood.

This is not about being satisfied with what is offered. It is about using every resource available to strengthen ourselves so that when the time comes, we can stand firm economically, socially, and institutionally as a self-reliant country.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐖𝐞 𝐌𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐇𝐚𝐯𝐞

Before any referendum or constitutional decision, our people must be informed, engaged, and empowered. This means:

• Presenting clear and realistic scenarios of what healthcare, education, justice, and the economy would look like under each option.

• Understanding what financial sustainability would require.

• Examining how borders, passports, environment, and security would function under independence or within a reformed Kingdom structure.

These are practical realities. They must be confronted with honesty and transparency.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐎𝐩𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐓𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞

Independence is not off the table, but it is not the only option. The referendum should present clear and manageable choices for the people to consider. Some examples include:

1. Stay as we are, maintaining the current constitutional structure.

2. Independence, with full preparation and readiness.

3. Consider a reformed Kingdom arrangement, making full use of the existing Charter to reflect true equality.

These options are illustrative, not exhaustive. Other possibilities may emerge through consultation and education. The goal is to inform and prepare our citizens so they can make an educated choice.

𝐃𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐒𝐭. 𝐌𝐚𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐞𝐧 𝐖𝐢𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐮𝐫𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐒𝐲𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐦

For now, as we operate within the current Kingdom structure, we will continue fighting for St. Maarten to be recognized as an equal and respected partner. At the same time, we remain open to options that truly benefit our people, whether that is independence, a reformed Kingdom arrangement, or other viable constitutional pathways.

The Kingdom Charter, especially Article 43, must be applied correctly as one complete article to strengthen cooperation, assert equality, and ensure the Netherlands is not positioned as a savior. When the new Dutch government takes office, I will ensure our position is known immediately to both the First and Second Chambers, so Sint Maarten’s voice is heard clearly and assertively.

We must also ensure that our institutions operate efficiently and effectively. Operating multiple institutions on a small island comes with high costs, and they must support the system rather than hinder it. For example, the Sociaal Economische Raad (SER) is essential for providing input on legislation, but delays, such as one of my proposals being with the SER for over a year, highlight the need for proper functioning. If these processes cannot work optimally, it may be necessary to review whether the system requires streamlining, as previously noted by the Prime Minister.

𝐒𝐭𝐞𝐩𝐬 𝐅𝐨𝐫𝐰𝐚𝐫𝐝: 𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐥𝐢𝐚𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐁𝐞𝐲𝐨𝐧𝐝

The path forward requires strategic, coordinated steps, starting within Parliament and extending to the broader population:

1. Legislative Preparation – Using Articles 92 and following of the Constitution (Staatsregeling), Parliament must lead in drafting and finalizing the legislation required for a referendum on our constitutional future.

2. Building Momentum – MP Irion’s motion was an initial recent attempt to start the referendum discussion. Though rejected for procedural reasons, it marked the start. Following this, MP Sarah Wescot-Williams’ commitment in January 2025 provided a second pathway in regard to spearheading drafting the referendum ordinance. It is critical that Parliament continues this work to finalize the referendum legislation.

3. Public Education and Awareness – Organize town hall meetings, community sessions, and school programs to clearly explain all options. Citizens must understand the practical implications of each choice.

4. Engagement with the Kingdom – Begin immediate, candid dialogue with the new Dutch government (First and Second Chambers) to assert Sint Maarten’s position as an equal partner, ensuring respect, cooperation, and mutual responsibility under the Kingdom Charter.

5. Ongoing Monitoring and Investment – Continue investing in our people, governance systems, and infrastructure using available resources, including the slavery reparations fund, to ensure that we are building a strong foundation for future decisions.

This is a deep and complex topic, and I know many may have strong opinions, and some may not agree with me. I could have chosen to remain silent, not only because I am chair of these two committees, and a lawyer but also because I consider this an important matter. I did not enter public service to stay quiet. We must have the dialogue, confront difficult topics, and agree to disagree where necessary, all to reach decisions that benefit our people.

This is a collective effort, all hands on deck. With the 15 members of Parliament, our leadership and collaboration can take Sint Maarten forward to the level it needs to be. The journey toward self-determination is a national responsibility. Preparation, education, legislation, and action must go hand in hand.

‍