MP Wever: Keep debate focused, educate the public on Ottley's two amendments

GREAT BAY--Member of Parliament Christopher Wever, who characteristically keeps his comments in Parliament short and to the point, on Tuesday urged Parliament to keep public debate tightly focused on the two specific amendments being proposed to the National Ordinance regulating admission to and expulsion from St. Maarten, warning that drifting too far from the subject risks confusing residents and giving the wrong impression of what MP Omar Ottley was presenting.

Member of Parliament Omar Ottley today defended his draft initiative law to amend the National Ordinance regulating admission to and expulsion from St. Maarten, outlining proposed changes aimed at strengthening the legal position of undocumented children born on St. Maarten who later find themselves without residency status due to administrative gaps tied to their parents.

Wever said that during the Central Committee debate he deliberately centered the conversation back to the actual content before Parliament, noting that the proposal deals with two points and “there’s nothing else to discuss but these two points that he wants to amend.” He said that after the meeting persons had messaged him to thank him for bringing the discussion back, reinforcing his view that Parliament has a responsibility to help the public clearly understand what is being debated, instead of allowing political side issues and grand standing to overshadow the legislation itself.

Wever stressed that Members of Parliament have a duty to educate the public on vital issues, not to complicate the conversation with rhetoric that may sound good but obscures what is actually being changed. He said it is common for parliamentary debates to drift into wider stories and political framing, but cautioned that if the discussion does not stay anchored to the real legal changes, the public can walk away with an inaccurate view of the initiative and what it would do.

He emphasized that the draft initiative law being debated seeks to amend two areas: lowering the qualifying age for residency by operation of law to 10 years old, and establishing an additional pathway linked to whether parents have been compliant with tax obligations for 10 consecutive years prior to the birth of the child. Wever said that unless Parliament speaks clearly about how these two provisions work, residents will not understand the proposal and confusion will grow around what the initiative does and does not do.

To support clarity, Wever also asked MP Ottley to explain how the two conditions would apply in practice, including cases where a child is born before parents reach the 10-year threshold, and whether the provisions must align or operate independently. He said that this type of plain explanation is necessary so the public can follow the debate and understand what Parliament is actually changing in law.

The first amendment lowers the age threshold in the law from 16 to 10 years for children born on St. Maarten who do not have Dutch nationality, replacing the current standard that requires they have been “continuously admitted” since birth. Under the proposed wording, eligibility would be based on proof that the child has lived on St. Maarten since birth, including proof such as registration with a childcare provider or educational institution.

The second amendment introduces an additional pathway for residency by operation of law for children born on St. Maarten whose parents have demonstrated long-term contribution through compliance with tax-related payment obligations. Ottley said the proposal adds a provision stating that a child born on St. Maarten, who does not possess Dutch nationality or another nationality, may be registered where the parents have fulfilled the payment obligation under St. Maarten tax legislation for 10 consecutive years prior to the birth of the child.

MP Ottley has to return to Parliament at a later date to answer the questions from MPs posed in the Central Committee meeting of Tuesday. After that the law will move to a Public Meeting of Parliament for voting.

‍