TEATT Minister hints at SHTA non-cooperation, says SER review of Soul Beach was independent

GREAT BAY--Minister of Tourism, Economic Affairs, Transport and Telecommunication Grisha Heyliger-Marten on Wednesday questioned why additional information was not submitted to the Social Economic Council during its review of the 2025 Soul Beach Music Festival, pointing out in Parliament that the St. Maarten Hospitality and Trade Association holds two seats on the SER.

“As most Members of Parliament and the general public are aware, the SHTA holds seats on the SER,” the minister said. “Therefore, I believe it is fair for us to ask ourselves a simple question: if additional information existed, why was it not provided to the SER during the course of their assessment?”

Her comments came as she pushed back against what she described as unfair attempts in Parliament to discredit the SER’s review of Soul Beach and portray the council as if it had simply repeated figures from the promoter.

Heyliger-Marten said that suggestion was false and misrepresented the work of the council, which she described as an independent advisory body that follows its own methodology when conducting assessments.

“I must address a concern raised regarding the SER report,” the minister said. “Some statements made in this room suggest that the SER relied solely on information provided by the promoter. That is simply not correct.”

According to the minister, the SER made clear in its report that it collected information from multiple sources, including stakeholder interviews with hotels, car rental companies, taxi operators, and other actors in the tourism sector, alongside available tourism and economic data.

She noted that many of the hotels approached by the SER were properties promoted on the Soul Beach website itself, which enabled the council to contact them directly and gather feedback on bookings, visitor activity, and the overall impact of the event.

Heyliger-Marten said it was unfortunate that an institution such as the SER, which plays an important role in advising both Government and Parliament, was now being portrayed as if it had merely echoed promoter-provided numbers.

“That characterization does a disservice to the professionalism and integrity of the Council,” she said.

The minister also criticized what she described as the selective use of the report during the parliamentary debate. She said isolated lines and snippets were being pulled from different sections and used as if they represented the report in full, creating a false impression that the SER had acted incompetently or irresponsibly.

“When a report is dissected in fragments rather than examined in its full context, including its methodology, scope, and conclusions, it creates a narrative that does not accurately reflect the work that was done,” the minister said.

She reminded Parliament that it was she who requested the SER review in the first place, precisely so that government and Parliament would have an independent assessment of the outcomes and economic impact of the Soul Beach event. She said she only received the finalized report about two weeks ago and was not prepared to appear before Parliament on the matter without first having that independent analysis in hand.

Heyliger-Marten also rejected claims that the SER had conducted its review without enough information or engagement. She said the report does not say that no information was received. Rather, she said, it shows that additional information was requested and later provided, and that the council also carried out direct consultations with stakeholders as part of its assessment.

“So the narrative that the SER conducted this review without information or without engagement is simply incorrect,” she said.

To reinforce her point, the minister cited specific sections of the report. She said that on page 6, the SER clearly states that it did not assess the legality of the subsidy or the policy decision behind the event, but focused strictly on evaluating the economic and promotional impact. She added that on page 7, the council explains the assumptions used in its analysis, including the 10 percent to 35 percent visitor attribution range linked to the event, which she said were not arbitrary numbers but clearly stated analytical assumptions.

Most significantly, the minister said, the SER concluded on page 12 that the event delivered substantial economic and promotional value for St. Maarten based on the data and stakeholder input analyzed.

Heyliger-Marten stressed that Members of Parliament are free to debate the report’s conclusions, but warned that such debate should not cross into undermining the credibility of national advisory institutions without a proper basis.

“The SER has provided an independent assessment using the available data and stakeholder consultation, and that information is now before Parliament so that we can have an informed and constructive discussion,” she said.

‍