Do we really lack “capacity?”

“Capacity” is the politically correct code word for adequate human resource. It has been the bane of our governance structure or perhaps better still, of our government apparatus for decades.

It got to a head in the mid 90s, when it resulted in the imposition of “higher supervision” on the island’s administration. Report after report had showed the shortcomings of the island’s administration, with the Pourier Report placing the final nail in the coffin of the island government.

Higher Supervision signaled the end of the political career of Dr. Claude Wathey, the legendary leader of the Democratic Party which had ruled the island for almost 40 years. Proclaiming famously that he was a “proud Caribbean man” who would not work under higher supervision, Claude resigned from the Island Council and consequently from the Executive Council) on the same day the Governor of the then Netherlands Antilles came to announce the Kingdom measure.

Did Higher Supervision solve the island’s lack of administrative capacity? While I am unaware of any particular study that focuses on the efficacy of the measure, it can be argued that despite schemes such as “technical assistance” and the “counterpart” programs aimed at solving the “capacity” issue, the real impact was that it actually replaced the speed of decision-making with slow bureaucratic red tape.

Whereas before Higher Supervision, the private sector, (particularly Mullet Bay Hotel and later Maho Beach Resort), was the largest employer of labor on the island, after Higher Supervision, government overtook the private sector in this role. Yet, the increase in staff did not really reduce the lack of capacity. This may be attributed in part to the change of political status on October 10, 2010 (“10-10-10”). The island then assumed the responsibilities that were hitherto carried out by the Federal Government in Curacao. These included the Police and other law enforcement agencies, Parliament and all the so-called “high councils of state” and full ministries which the island did not have before.

How do we explain the fact that the period of largest economic expansion was when the island government consisted of an Executive Council of three members - the Lt.-Governor as Chairman and two commissioners - and an Island Council of five that grew progressively to nine? In contrast, today we have an economic slowdown despite having a seven-member Council of Ministers and a Parliament of 15 representatives.

One could deduce from this that bigger government has not necessarily meant a better economy for the island, but that would leave out a lot of internal and external factors that should be taken into account before reaching such a conclusion.  However, the bottom line is that whatever we have been doing to address the presumed lack of capacity has not yielded the desired results and this in spite of the trend of more people leaving the private sector for the more secure (and some would say less stressful) government jobs. We must note that historically the reverse was the case prior to 10-10-10.

So, how do we build capacity?

First of all, we cannot continue doing the same thing and expect different results. There is a name for that which is not very flattering. Obviously, Higher Supervision has not worked, although it is still wielded by The Hague as a Sword of Damocles over our heads. The technical assistance and counterpart policies have not worked either. We need to abandon them and seriously seek alternatives tailored to our specific needs.

Capacity-building should be approached  systematically and creatively with short, mid and long term plans. Of course, it is a no-brainer to say education is the key to capacity building. However, we could ask what has been the return on investment from the island’s pretty large investment in the education sector over the years? The talk about brain drain is just part of the story. In my view, we don’t just need an educational reform but a complete overhaul of the system. I’ll address that in subsequent articles.

In the short term, we should take a closer look at the available pool of qualified local professionals and how we can better utilize them. For example, to mitigate the shortage of Policemen, there are quite a number of them who are retired and are in good health. Why can’t some of them be employed to handle desk jobs which would then free the younger ones to go out more on the beat? The same could be done for other sectors where there is critical shortage of qualified staff.

There are also many St. Martin professionals working in several countries. We should find them and consider offering them similar emoluments and conditions of service as we offer expatriates as an incentive for them to come back home to contribute to their island.

Of course, there are several other ideas that could be explored but central to all of them must be a clear, unequivocal policy to employ locals first. “St. Martiners must come first in their own island,” must not remain an empty slogan. We must vigorously pursue it as a policy both in the public and private sectors. We cannot in one breath complain that we lack capacity and at the same time ignore the ones we have for personal, political, ideological, social or any other reasons.

It is a shame that some of our best minds have to leave the island to work in foreign lands while we gladly employ non-St. Martiners in jobs they are qualified to do. If we continue on this path, the cries of “lack of capacity” would ring hollow.

‍