THE
ST-MARTIN YOU WILL BE VOTING FOR
IN MARCH 2017 - PLEA AGAINST ST-MARTIN DEBT BURDEN
Today
July 14th,
2016, I'm publishing the last article I will write on the politics of
St-Martin.
Judging from the last 9 years reality of facts under the status of a French Overseas Collectivity, it
is clear to me that the local governance of St-Martin has
retrograded to a scapegoat role within an unprecedented colonial
centralization regime delegated in the hands of the State's appointed
representatives, préfet and préfet délégué
Under the called
article 74 of the French Constitution, neither do we have a true autonomous country nor we find elected leaders willing to acknowledge the true reality of their true authority in dealing with the transferred competences within the said to be autonomous overseas Collectivity.
The true reality is that we have a local elected body reduced to a scapegoats role and used simply to absolve the State's government of its crimes against the natives collective and private heritage as well as general and individual interests.
Today beside our socio-economic disastrous conditions, we have to deplore the total absence of accountability at all level of the government in regards to the hideous assassination of our youth while in the hands and responsibility of the justice,
In spite of such evidences, the rat race at the horizon in
upcoming Overseas Collectivity elections is enough evidence proven
that all is today irreparably lost in matters of protection of
indigenous St-Martin.
"Where there is no vision, the people perish" (Proverbs 29:18).
It is convinced of the irreversible hopeless context my homeland St-Martin has evolved into today that I have decided to end my written political analysis and consecrate
the balance of my time from now on, on cultivating my home-garden and
writing my autobiography and auto-Eulogy.
Before taken this
life retreat from the politics of my homeland, I'm writing and publishing the hereafter article as the expression of my will
to share with you, my patriots, my thoughts on the St-Martin you
likely will be voting for a few months from today but also as a plea against the fact that my homeland is today just like the African ex-colonies and Haiti, is condemned to pay to France, a perpetual yearly evaluated debt burden that I consider to be a reprehensible hoax.
I cannot quit without publishing a plea against leaving my homeland condemned to a perpetual yearly reevaluated debt to pay to France for reasons that cannot be constitutionally justified.
The newly
created Collectivity of St- Martin was officially handed over to our
elected leaders on January 1st,
2008 with a budget in running expenditures evaluated at 74,6 millions
euros, but before the end budgetary year the resources to finance this budget was reduced by 46,6 millions euros.
This 2008 budget fixed at 74,6 millions euros was already significantly below the budget of Anguilla (6 500 inhabitants) and
quite three times below the running expenditures budget of Dutch
St-Maarten, 40 000 inhabitants compared to French St-Martin 37 000
inhabitants
Note
that the newly created Overseas Collectivity is supposed to be
assuming the competences of three institutions ( Region
-Departement-Commune), but the 1997 budget of the sole Commune was
already up to 99 millions euros(650 millions francs},
So St-
Martin was granted in 2008 the status of an Overseas Collectivity of
France (COM) which comprises of the competences of three
Institutions: Commune, Departement and Regions, with a budget
representing only 75,35% of the single Commune 1997 budget and to make things worst, reality of facts reveals that the resources transferred were cut down to no more than 28 millions euros before the end of 2008.
In other words the 2008 transferred competences budget by the end of budget year accused a deficit of 46,6 millions euros.
And
not one of our politicians instigators of the COM had protested
against this fact that has resulted today, in placing the people of
St-Martin under a fiscal pressure evaluated to over 350% compared to
St-Martin running under the status of a sole Commune of
Guadeloupe.
The 74,6 millions euros running expenditures was
compensated by:
32,6
millions (44% ), in taxation transferred at potential value
of
which 16,4 millions was officially recognized as potentially
non-collectable.
36,9
millions in allowances including compensations(dotations)
5,1 budget deficit not compensated and
treated as non-existing.
In
spite of this budgetary precariousness, between 2008 and 2012 the
State recuperated 7 millions euros off of the transfer of competences
budget resources, by operating cuts on the 2009 to 2012 allowances due to
St-Martin, this said to be recuperation of overplus allowances
wrongly paid to St-Martin from 2008 to 2010.
And on the back
of the above, in April 2011 the State decided to inflict St-Martin
with a perpetual yearly reevaluated debt burden evaluated at 634
126,00 euros for the year 2008. Certainly likely African ex-colonies, as payback for colonization benefits
This price tag, formerly known
in the history of France under the appellation 'Assignat”, has
simply completed article 53 of the constitution that reserves to the
French Republic the rights to cede any of its overseas territories to
any other Nation.
Can one explain to me how can St-Martin be constitutionally an integral part of France, yet the people can be condemned to pay to France a perpetual yearly debt burden?
What more make of this perpetual debt a
reprehensible hoax is the fact that it result from the only
readjustment of the charges of the sole Fire Department transferred
from the Department/Guadeloupe to the Collectivity in 2008.
For
this year 2016, the running expenditures budget of the Collectivity
is fixed at 137 millions euros, an increase of over 185% compared to
the 2008 transfer of competences budget (74,6 millions)
And a
fiscal receipt budgeted at the sum of 81,01 millions euros, an
increase of 249% compared to the 32,6 millions of the 2008 transfer
of competences budget.
A budgetary increase essentially paid
by the implementation upon the unprivileged social strata residents
of unprecedented taxations, abusive and fraudulent impositions,
fraudulent taxation calculations,
All which will be illegal
if refer to the French national fiscal legislation, but permissible
upon the power of the said granted Fiscal Autonomy to SXM.
Useless
to plead our fate before the Conseil d'Etat or the Conseil
Constitutionnel they both refer not the laws and fundamental
principles of the French Republic but squarely dismiss any case of
abuse of fiscal power of the COM St-Martin place before them by
slyly assimilating the fiscal autonomy of COM St-Martin to the 1830's
regime of the colonies when the French constitution declared that the
regime of colonies is determined by special laws called the colonial
charter (La Charte Coloniale).
Remember, the January 1st,
1798 constitution of France (La Convention) also did declared the
autonomy of the colonies within the sovereignty of the Republic,
represented by an agent of the Republic, the first appointed to
Guadeloupe including St-Martin, was Victor HUGUES, no need to recall
the despotism and bloody terror that the natives suffered under his
reign.
Paris declarations of autonomy within the Republic to
French Overseas territories had always meant and will always meant
more power in the hands of the State's appointed representatives and
a local elected government reduced to a scapegoat role.
Considering
all the above, and looking unfold such a shameful rat race between
natives contemplating the president seat of the Collectivity in
coming up march 2017 COM elections,
A rat race in which none
is less incompetent than the other and all to blame directly and
indirectly for the immature unfolding of the new status of St-Martin
and the catastrophic situation the country natives are now confronted
with.
It therefore becomes very clear to me that voicing my
opinion in such an irrational, self-centered, egocentric............ context, is likely a lonely man crying out in a vast no man's
land.
So I have decided after the publication of this ultimate
article to retreat in my home-garden, write out my autobiography and
auto-Eulogy and simply wait and see.
What
will be, will be, Que sera sera.
A PERPETUAL
YEARLY DEBT BURDEN INFLICTED BY FRANCE: A REPREHENSIBLE HOAX
On
December 30th,
2008, St-Barth learn that it has been inflicted a
perpetual yearly reevaluated debt burden, fixed at the sum of
5 600
000,00 euros for the year 2008.
And from April 2011, we also
find the Collectivity of St-Martin also pleading against an inflicted
perpetual yearly reevaluated debt burden, fixed at the sum of 634
126,00 euros for the year 2008.
Never
in a dream in this 21st
century one would have expected the French metropolitan Government to
condemn two little islands in the Caribbean Sea, St-Martin 20 square
miles and St-Barth 9,7 square miles to pay a debt burden for a bare
administrative change of status from a Commune of Guadeloupe to an
Overseas Collectivity of France, a debt known in a regrettable
period of France decolonization of Africa history as a debt burden
for colonization benefits,
A change of status that by an irony
of fate consist is reality of facts to more a higher implication of
the State representatives, the préfet, in the day to day run of
St-Martin public affairs, than real administrative autonomy in the
hands to the local elected leaders, to the exception of the full
power to squeeze life out of the unprivileged residents in the name
of fiscal autonomy.
This
inflicted perpetual yearly debt burden is in perfect alignment with
General
Charles De Gaulle offer to the Africans from 1958 as alternative to
the colonization continuation pact linking France to its African
colonies: “
Your independence comes at the cost of paying a yearly debt to France
as compensation for colonization benefits”. Africa
paid a very high cost for there independence, not only financially
but most sadly by the savage taken down of the life of its most
prominent true independent minded leaders.
In 1963 the debt of
newly independent African countries, former colonies of France, was
huge, for many countries it represented almost 40% of their running
expenditures budget and if not mistaken they are yet up to this day
subject to this debt as cost of their independence from France.
Also
added to this debt, these African countries had to suffer drastic
financial and economic constraints in their international relations.
Closer to us, we are
also reminded the debt burden Haiti is yet paying to France as ransom
required for the official recognition of its independence acquired by
force since 1804.
WHY
THIS DEBT BURDEN IS BUT A REPREHENSIBLE HOAX?
Referring
to an April 22nd,
2011 “arrêté Ministériel”, and a subsequent April 19th,
2012 ministerial “Circulaire” addressed to the préfet, it is
stated that COM St-Martin is indebted to State (France) for the sum
of 634 126,00 euros as resulting from an adjustment of the
decentralization allowances (DGD) and generated from a difference in
the 2008 evaluation of charges of the Fire Department transferred
from the Departement/Guadeloupe to the newly created COM
St-Martin.
If not mistaken, in none of the above mentioned
ministerial documents it is stated that this debt was to be
translated into a perpetual yearly reevaluated debt for St-Martin in
favor of France, it is simply indicated for Guadeloupe an adjustment
of the DGD and for St-Martin an adjustment of the DGC.
Unlike
St-Barth perpetual yearly debt that was confirmed by article 6 of the
December 30th,
2008 “Loi de Finances Rectificative”, unless mistaken, I found no
“Loi de Finances Rectificative” attributing to this debt of COM
St-Martin, the same perpetual nature as the debt of St-Barth.
So in this article,
I'm referring to different court cases filed by COM St-Martin to get
this yearly debt burden lifted and all the media comments
characterizing this debt as of the same nature as St-Barth debt
burden.
So
providing that this St-Martin yearly debt burden fixed at the sum of
: 634 126 euros, for the year 2008, is not a joke taken for serious
by our local leaders,
I
have make it my duty to analyze the calculations leading to this debt
burden and to conclude on its true characteristics
We Know that the
Collectivity of St-Barth, is condemned by article 6 of the
December 30th, 2008 “Loi de Finances Rectificative
(LFR)” in modification of article 104 of the December 25th,
2007 “LFR” to pay a perpetual yearly reevaluated debt burden to
the State (France) in compensation of France's claimed lost in
resources in the evaluation of the transfer of competences in the
change of status from a Commune to an Overseas Collectivity of
France.
This St-Barth
debt burden fixed for the year 2008 at the sum of : 5 600 000,00
euros consist in its totality of State's taxation transferred (6
069 000 euros)
To the contrary St-Martin Debt burden fixed
for the year 2008 at the sum of 634 126,00 euros consist in its
totality of a simply difference in the 2008 evaluation of the
Charges of the Fire Department of which the competences have been
transferred from Guadeloupe to COM St-Martin.
Curiously we find the debt of St-Barth in all “LFR” following the 2008
LFR up to the 2015 LFR, the last I verified, and a complete silence
in regards to St-Martin's said yearly debt burden?
At the date,
December 30th, 2008 of publication of St-Barth debt burden
we know that the transferred budget for St-Martin was accusing a
deficit at the sum of 5 103 895 euros that
the State legally had to take at its charge, but a complete silence
was observed as if it did not existed.
Click on image below for full view.
The 15 879 000 euros Global compensation balance in
favor of the State, represents St-Martin's debt to France as result
of the excess in State's taxation transferred.
But since the
State has to pay to St-Martin 20 982 000,00 €
compensation/account + taxes relief withhold).
Finally, we find the 2008 transferred budget of
compensations charges/Resources, indicating a deficit of: 5 103
000,00 €,
the exact opposite to St-Barth. This deficit legally
should have been charged to the State's compensation account as to
balance the newly created COM St-Martin Budget.
The newly
created COM St-Martin was therefore handed down from the State a
starting off budget accusing a deficit of over 5,1 millions euros.
And this to the sacred silence of all.
Yet, from the year
2009, the State (France) is to benefit of 11 975 000,00 €
(726 + 3 699 + 7 550) withhold as recuperation of taxes relief
grants formerly compensated at the level of
Region-Departement-Commune.
As formerly all tax reliefs
granted to individuals and businesses were at the charge of the
State's budget, but since St-Martin is said to have fiscal autonomy,
this policy is extended only up to fiscal year 2008 and from the
fiscal year 2009, any tax relief granted to individuals and
businesses will be exclusively charged to the budget of St-Martin
Collectivity.
On the other hand, France is to benefit slyly
of 10 956 000,00 €
in “Octroi de mer” included and counted in the 2008 transferred
budget as a resource transferred from the Departement/Guadeloupe to
COM St-Martin, but the Departement/Guadeloupe will cease
paying this fund to St-Martin from January 1st,2009, yet, the
State refuses to compensate St-Martin for this lost of 2008
resource transferred, by evoking some sort of incomprehensible
defensive argument, saying the reason this tax cannot be compensated
is that it was not a St-Martin locally enforced taxation.
The
only sense I can find in such an a defensive argument is a slyly
suggestion to St-Martin to use its fiscal autonomy to institute this
Octroi-de mer taxation in St-Martin which will call for setting up
customs offices at our border with Dutch St-Maarten.
Therefore, taken into consideration
the above facts, France, from the only 2008 transferred budge of
competences has made a 28 034 000,00 €
profit (5 103+11 975+10 956) on the head of St-Martin on this change
of Status from a Commune of Guadeloupe to an Overseas Collectivity
of France.
At the preliminary stage of the transfer of
competences process, it was stated in the articles LO. 6271-5 and
LO.6371-5 of the CGCT that the State was to guarantee
the financial neutrality of the transfer of competences not
only in favor of the two newly created Collectivities, St-Martin and
St-Barth, but also in favor of the Department/ Guadeloupe and
Region/Guadeloupe.
Meaning that any insufficiency or excess
of the resources transferred compared to the charges transferred
will be neutralized by imputation on the sole State's compensation
account.
The
above was confirmed by article104
of the December 25th,
2007 “Loi de finances Rectificative (LFR)
Unfortunately,
this
principle of neutrality promised by the State, was to vanish by
article 6 of a December 30th,
2008 “Loi de Finances Rectificative (LFR)” modifying article 104
of the previous 2007 LFR and deciding that all excess in resources
transferred henceforth constitute a yearly reevaluated debt
refundable to the State (France), payable by the issue by the Prefet
of Region Guadeloupe at the beginning of January for the
concerned year of a “titre de perception” that must be paid by
the COM by the latest 6 months after its date of issue.
As a
result, struck by surprise, only COM St-Barth
was stated in the law condemned to this yearly perpetual debt burden
towards the State(France) evaluated for 2008 at the sum of: 5, 6
millions euros.
The
law remained silent regarding COM St-Martin and this because
contrary to St-Barth, the transferred budget for St-Martin indicated
a 5,1 millions euros deficit that legally the State should have been
considered indebted to St-Martin for.
It
is only 3 years later that St-Martin officially or unofficially
found itself fighting to get relief from a yearly perpetual debt
burden towards the State (France) evaluated for 2008 at the sum of :
634 126 euros,
What attracts curiosity in this COM St-Martin
issue, is the fact that for St-Barth, we find this modification of
article 104 of the 2007 LFR in every LFR published since 2008 and
contrarily a complete silence regarding St-Martin.
A search
up to the 2015 LFR reveals no trace of any rectification of art. 104
of the 2007 LFR confirming this St-Martin debt burden and most of
all the payment modalities, as in 2011 we count four potentially
years ow as back-payment.
Curiously, in spite of the fact
that all transferred budget of evaluation of charges and resources
indicate a deficit to be compensated by France in favor of COM
St-Martin,
we note in same article 6 of the 2008 LFR, a total
silence concerning the above global compensation and no reference of
a yearly debt for St-Martin, but as result of a separated analytical
readjustment of transferred charges and resources from Guadeloupe
institutions to COM St-Martin, indication of
a 4
184 084,00 €
cut to be operated on the “dotation forfaitaire” due to St-
Martin and recuperated by sums of 2 092 042,00 €
on each of the years 2009 and 2010.
And
again by the same method as above, on the April 19th,
2011 “ministerial Circulaire” in addition to the 634 126,00 €
debt burden, it is also indicated that: it
will be operated a cut of 1 393 592,00 €
on each of the years 2011 and 2012 DGC of St-Martin in recuperation
of a total excess of 2 787 184,00 €
decentralization fund (DGD) paid to the Collectivity of St-Martin
by error during the years 2008, 2009 and 2010.
Therefore
while St-Barth compensation debt burden of 5,6 million euros had
remained unchanged since the 2008 LFR, we find ever since the State
squeezing St-Martin as one will squeeze the juice out a lemon.
We
find the COM St-Martin suffering a pay-back penalty amounting to a
total of 6 971 268,00 € (2 092 042 x 2 + 2 787 184) plus a
perpetual yearly reevaluated debt, evaluated at the sum of 634
126,00 € for the year 2008.
At the same time the
minister of the budget was operating all the above cuts on the
decentralization allowances and the compensation allowances due to
St-Martin, all to be essentially to the benefit of the Guadeloupe,
Using the same said definitive evaluation of the transferred
charges and resources published in the arrêté
du 22/04/2011 and “ 19/04/2012 “Circulaire”, an accurate and
sincere accountancy in conformity with the methods fixed by the
Organic law, reveals a State's compensation debt in favor of the
St-Martin Collectivity for the sum of 10 415 000,00 €.
The
compensations operations figuring on the right side of the above
statement is a result of my accountancy following the same procedure
as the CCEC 2007 Statement and strictly based on the figures
published in the April 22nd,
2011 arrêté
and the April 19th,2012
“circulaire ministériel”
said to be the definitive evaluation of charges and resources
transferred.
The other anomaly with the calculation of this 2011
compensation of charges and resources transferred is that the figures
published seems to be all in 2008 value, when if not mistaken by the
organic law and the 2007 LFR the evaluation of the charges
transferred in the calculation of the transfer of competences budget
had to be considered at their 2006 value for the charges and for the
taxations at their 2005 value.
Here
after is a summary account resulting from the
above mentioned
ministerial documents:
The above summary shows clearly
that St-Martin is in debt to France for
12 180 000 euros resulting from
the surplus in taxation resources transferred by the State
But
since it also shows that France has to pay to St-Martin 22 595 000
euros in compensations allowances (DGC), Here again this
compensation operation shows the State (France) indebted to
St-Martin for the sum of: 10 415 000,00 €
To
this debt should be added the 10 956 000,00 €
in “Octroi de mer” formerly paid to St-Martin by the
Departement/Guadeloupe as its quota in importation taxes collected
not in St-Martin but on continental Guadeloupe on the importation of
goods, and included in the 2008 budget of transfer of competences.
Because of its fiscal autonomy, this “Octroi-de-mer”
tax will no more be due and paid to St-Martin from January 1st,
2009,
Yet the State (France) refuses to compensate St-Martin
for this lost in resource included in the 2008 transfer of
competences budget, by advancing the incomprehensible defensive
argument that this resource was not a St-Martin locally enforced
tax.
However this defensive argument may be interpreted, it
remains unacceptable in substance due to the fact that the criteria
retained for compensation was not based on the nature of the
resources or of the charges but simply on the
fundamental principle prescribed by the Organic law which is the
State observing a strict financial neutrality in the transfer of
competences operation, using the State's Global Compensation account
as neutralizer.
The national
motto of France being: “Liberty-Equality-Fraternity”, equality
obliges the following questions:
Why
St-Barth is condemned by the 2008 LFR to a perpetual yearly debt
burden in favor of France because the compensation balance reveals a
debt of 5 676 744,00 €
in favor of France?
And the same 2008 LFR remains silent when
the same compensation statement indicates for COM St-Martin a
deficit balance for the sum of:
5 103 895,00 €,
that
France should legally be indebted to St-Martin
Why
not a perpetual yearly reevaluated debt of France in favor of
St-Martin?
And even
if we should consider the April 22nd,
2011 said definitive evaluation of the charges, France still remains
indebted to St-Martin for the sum of 10 415 000,00 €
as compensations balance.
Yet by a manifest abuse of power and through arbitrary
hypothesis, the Minister of the Budget manage to convert this debt
of France to a 914 995,00 €
(reduced to 634 126) perpetual yearly debt of St-Martin in favor of
France.
Concerning the
calculation leading to St-Martin's 634 126,00 euros yearly debt
By
the terms of the organic law, the resources in taxes transferred
were calculated on the amount of taxes that the State was liable to
collect the year before the last year preceding the entry into
effect of the Organic law, therefore the year 2005 taxes.
The
“Conseil Constitutionnel” further precised the year 2005
resources in taxes must be taken at their theoretical potential
level and not by the amount effectively collected in 2005.
The
evaluation of the charges by the December 25th, 2007
“LFR” also by the dispositions of the organic law, were to be
calculated at their 2006 value.
On the contrary, by the terms
of the April 19th, 2012 “Circulaire no.
10CB/12/08200/C” and the April 22nd, 2011 Ministerial
“arrêté”(decree)
it had been decided to evaluate the charges leading to St-Martin
634 126, 00 euros at the 2008 charges value.
In short,
St-Barth debt burden is evaluate at its 2006 value but St-Martin
debt burden is calculated at its 2008 value. Does anyone has an
explanation for this disparity?
Referring to the “Circulaire
no. 10CB/12/08200/C dated April 19th, 2012, this
St-Martin debt of 634 126,00 euros in favor of France has been
calculated as followed:
The charges of the department
“Incendie & Secours” transferred from the
Department/Guadeloupe to the COM St-Martin are said to have been
overvalued and therefore had to be reduced from sum of 1 554 934
euros to the sum of 680 490 euros given a difference of 874 449
euros at 2006 value converted to 914 995 euros in 2008 value.
This
subsequently reduced the decentralization allowances (DGD) from
2 811
220 euros to 1 896 225 euros, difference 914 995 euros (2 811 220 –
1896 225) as surplus in resources transferred to St-Martin in
2008.
Seemingly in the books of the minister of the budget,
St-Martin had a credit for the sum of 280 868 euros, therefore after
deduction from the 914 995, this brought to the 634 126 euros
debt.
The juridical question is was the sum of 280 868 euros
of the same nature as the 914 995 euros, as the difference leads to
a perpetual yearly debt burden, if not this can be legally
characterized as subtracting goats from sheep and finding a balance
in sheep.
Already we note that St-Barth debt burden is
originated from an excess in taxation transferred when on the
contrary St-Martin debt burden is originated from a readjustment of
charges relating to the sole Fire Department,
It is obvious
that this compensation of the above mentioned ministry, had nothing
in common with the work assigned to the CCEC of St-Martin, that had
fixed definitively in its sitting of July 7th, 2009 the
evaluation of the charges transferred from the Region, the
“Département”
and the Commune.
The
mission of this special St- Martin CCEC was therefore considered
accomplished and had no further reason to be yet existing on the
date of January 13th, 2011 as claimed in the above
mentioned “Circulaire”
And it was never question of a
debt burden against St-Martin but simply readjustment of the
different allowances (dotations)
The question is how true can
be the statement in the April 19th, 2012 claiming: “
the procedure leading to this debt of St-Martin in favor of France
was taken after favorable “avis” of the majority of the members
of the St-Martin CCEC in there sitting of January 13th,
2011.”
Another question is by what constitutional
law or principle can an operation consisting in the readjustment of
the charges of a single budget item, the charges of the department
“incendie & Secours” (the fire department) can be translated
into a perpetual yearly debt burden?
Here are some of the
irregularities committed by the minister of the budget:
He
singled out the budgetary item “incendie & Secours” out of 8
items in total transferred by the “Département/Guadeloupe”
to COM St-Martin
His
calculation is based on the hypothesis that the item he singled out
was 100% compensated by the only decentralization allowances (DGD)
resources, which absolutely false.
The global compensation
was fungible and therefore not liable to individualization. And
referring to the 1 554 939 euros in charges transferred by the
“Département/Guadeloupe”
in 2008 (2006 value), the compensation was fungible
divided:
-Partly by resources in taxation
-Partly
by different types of allowances
-Partly by the
“Octroi-de-mer” resources that was yet in effect in 2008.
And
considering the refusal of the State to compensate the lost of this
resource from 2009, the COM St-Martin should have been within its
legitimate rights to claim that this lost of resource be validated
as a compensation asset in any eventuality of readjustment of the
charges and resources of the 2008 transfer of competence budget, in
particular that should intervene between the Departement/Guadeloupe
and the COM St-Martin.
The
minister of the budget acted as if no readjustment had ever
intervened between 2008 and 2011 the date of his now readjustment.
Again a false pretence, because we read in article 6 of the December
30th, 2008 LFR the following:
“By derogation
of article 104 of the December 25th, 2007
LFR, the basic allowances (dotation forfaitaire) paid to the
Collectivity of St-Martin in 2009 and 2010 in respect of article L.
6364-3 of the CGCT will be reduced every year at the sum of 2 092
042 euros as for the recuperation of the overplus paid in
2008.”And
in this same April 19th,
2011 “ministerial Circulaire” in addition to the 634 126,00
debt burden, it is also indicated: “that
it will be operated a cut of 1 393 592 euros on each of the years
2011 and 2012 DGC of St-Martin in recuperation of a total excess of
2 787 184 euros decentralization fund (DGD) paid to the
Collectivity of St-Martin by error during the years 2008, 2009 and
2010.”
So
What are the defining characteristics of the charges of the Fire
Department readjustment making of it a perpetual yearly reevaluated
debt burden?
Why not the above approximate 7 millions euros
readjustment of the transferred “Dotations”?
Why it simply stipulated in the “Circulaire” that this 634
126,00 euros adjustment was to be charged to the compensation
account of COM St-Martin
Why
we find no subsequent LFR precising the payment modalities of this
St-Martin debt, as for St-Barth we know it was stipulated in the
2008 LFR that debt
will subject to yearly “Titre de perception” .
If
instead of singling out the only Fire Department, we consider the
global compensation account for the all eight competences
transferred from the Departement/Guadeloupe to St-Martin, calculated
in the new evaluation figures of the minister of the budget, the
result is as followed:
And as the above “Sources and Applications
of the Transferred Resources and Charges statement” shows, the
global compensation of all the competences transferred from all four
institutions (State, Region, Departement , Commune) amount to the
sum of 10 415 000,00
€
in the benefit of COM St-Martin, that France should have remained
indebted for.
Therefore my conclusion on this debt:
Taken
into consideration the above observations and the above statement
titled
“ Sources and application of transferred resources &
Charges”
Considering
the fact that the above statement takes into consideration in its
calculations the rectifications indicated in the above mentioned
“circulaire ministeriel of April 19th, 2012,
as
well as the evaluation of charges as published in the April 22nd,
2011 ministerial decree and we find the St-Martin transfer of
competences budget accusing a deficit of 10 415 000,00 €
that should have been compensated by the State.
Considering
the fact that the debt of 634 126,00 €
results not from the compensation statements prepared in conformity
with the fungible method prescribed by the February 21st,
2007 organic law and the December 25th, 2007 LFR, but
from a singled out analytical readjustment of the sole DGD of the
Departement of Guadeloupe done by the minister of the
budget,
Considering that this debt was not calculated by the
St-Martin's “Commission Consultative d'Evaluation des Charges
(CCEC) but by an unilateral analytical evaluation and arbitrary
hypothesis done by the minister of the budget, singling out the
compensation of the charges of a single item out of eight
transferred from the Departement/Gpe to the COM St-Martin in 2008
Considering the fact that the readjustment object of the
“Circulaire” dated April 19th, 2012 and the April
22nd, 2011 Ministerial decree was done under the
hypothesis that the concerned charges of the Fire Department were
compensated 100% by “Dotation Globale de Decentralisation (DGD)”
Considering the fact that in the 2008 compensation budget
the concerned charges of the Fire Department, were compensated not
solely by decentralization allowances (DGD) but in a fungible manner
by resources in taxation, “Octroi-de-mer” resources and by
different allowances.
Considering therefore that the fact for the minister of the budget
to single out the only DGD resources is obviously an arbitrary act,
more when considering on the other hand that COM St-Martin is
“Laissée
pour compte” with the robbed away non-compensated “Octroi-de-mer”
resource.
Considering the fact that the 2008 compensation
budget was subject to many previous readjustments namely the
readjustments of article 6 of the December 30th, 2008 LFR
and of the same “circulaire” now in question,
Considering
that by the dispositions of the 2007 LFR, the readjustment of excess
resources transferred by the Departement/Guadeloupe to St-Martin was
to be subject to regularization of the DGD of the
Departement/Guadeloupe and for St-Martin to a reduction of the
“DGC” of the latter for the concerned amount,
Considering
that up the 2008 LFR, the DGC regarding COM St-Martin was globally
credited of the sum of 5 103 895,00 €,
sum that the State was indebted to St-Martin as compensation funds.
Considering the fact that even in the eventuality of a
separated compensation at the level of the Departement/Guadeloupe,
based on the same said definitive evaluations of charges, the
“Dotation Globale de Compensation (DGC)” at the level of the
Departement/Guadeloupe summed up to a compensation of : 2 041 000,00
€
in favor of St-Martin,
Considering that the nature of this
COM
St-Martin 634 126,00 €
debt, resulting from a readjustment of charges transferred is
contrary in its nature to the debt related in
the dispositions article 6 of the 2008 LFR, that clearly specify
"debt
resulting
from an excess of resources transferred", understanding undoubtedly excess in taxation
transferred.
Considering
the fact article L.O. 6371-5 of the CGCT in its dispositions clearly specify an asymmetrical procedure of compensation for COM-St-Martin compared to St-Barth, Quote:: “
In the case that the Departement/Guadeloupe may transfer more
resources than charges, the State will proceed to a readjustment of
the DGD of Guadeloupe; and in return St-Martin will suffer a
deduction of same amount on its DGC; On the contrary the situation
of St-Barth will remain uncharged, the situation remaining at the
charge of the State”
Considering
that the dispositions of article 6 of the 2008 LFR modifying the
last alinea of the 3 of II of article 104 of the 2007 LFR and
replacing the words: “est a la charge de l'Etat” by “fait
l'objet d'un titre de perception...” were exclusively reserved to
the COM St-Barth; As stated above, the latter had benefit of an
asymmetrical compensation procedure compared to COM St-Martin.
It is
undeniable, up to proof of the contrary, that the declared COM
St-Martin yearly debt in favor of the State (France), evaluated for
the year 2008 at the sum of 634 126,00 €,
is an arbitrary act, built upon false hypothesis and an abuse of
power. Therefore as such, has no valid legal justification and should be pronounced null and void.
From my point of view
the COM St-Martin has up to this day shamefully mishandled this case
and this because none want to question his incompetence in the
entire transfer of competences process.
APPROACH
OF THE COM St-MARTIN SEEKING RELIEF OF THIS PERPETUAL YEARLY DEBT
By a
July 5th, 2011, “requête”
before the the “Conseil d'Etat”, the St-Martin Collectivity
protested against this debt burden of 634126,00€
on the only grounds that the State has not compensated all the
transferred resources from the Commune,
On
December 26th, 2013, the Conseil d'Etat turned over the
“requête”
before the Administrative Court of Paris on the grounds of the
irregularity character of the April 22nd,2011“arrêté”.
This
case to my knowledge should yet be pending before this Paris
court,
Yet, recently, for unknown reason, in parallel to
this supposedly pending case before the Paris Administrative Court,
we learn that in a January 2016 “requête”,
the
president of the COM St-Martin, Aline HANSON, seized the
Administrative Court of Basse-Terre in the form of a “Question
Prioritaire de Constitutionnalité
(QPC)”
This on the grounds that “the
Global compensation allowances “Dotation Globale de Compensation
(DGC)” was conceived to guaranteed the neutrality of the operation
of transfer of competences, and this render the modalities retained
by article 6 of the 2008 LFR in rectification of article LO. 6271-5
of the CGCT and article 104 of the 2007 LFR,
not conform with
the Constitution.
And that as a result of this fact, the COM
St-Martin found itself under a perpetual yearly debt burden to pay
to the State, evaluated for the year 2008 at the sum of : 634 126,00
€
In
consideration of which, the president Aline HANSON, demand the Court
to pronounce the non-conformity of this debt with the Constitution”
The
unfolding of the procedure is as follows:
By
ordinance of January 22nd,
2016, the Administrative Court submitted the QPC to the “Conseil
d'Etat”
By
an April 13th,
2016 decision, the “Conseil d'Etat” forwarded over the QPC to
the “Conseil Constitutionel”
By a July 1st,
2016 the Conseil Constitutionnel dismissed the president Aline
HANSON in her demand, and pronounced
the contested compensation Debt in conformity with the constitution.
We
may also recall president Aline HANSON plea to the president of the
Republic Francois HOLLANDE during his Mai 8th,
2015 visit to St-Martin and the president in reply given a rigid
uncompromising position in regards to any relief of this perpetual
yearly debt.
But I'm forced to believe that this recent
initiative of president Aline Hanson and the procedure of the
Administrative Court of Basse-Terre are simply game-playing, and
this for the simple fact that the COM St-Barth had taken the
identical initiatives three years ago upon the same grounds and in
the same form of a QPC and the case was dismissed by the same
“Conseil Constitutionnel”
The
unfolding of this St-Barth case:
In
November 2013 the Collectivity of St-Barthelemy seized the
Administrative Court of Basse-Terre/Guadeloupe in the form of a
“Question Prioritaire de Constitutionnalite (QPC).
The
COM recalled the fact that by the dispositions of article 6 of the
2008 “ Loi des Finances Rectificative (LFR)”:
“The
debt due to the State (France) in excess of resources transferred is
to be subject every year to a “Titre de perception” issued by
the Prefet of Region/Guadeloupe during the month of January of the
year concerned and payment must intervene by the latest 6 months
after.
Exceptionally the debt due for the year 2008, will be
subject to two “Titre de perception”, each for the sum of 2 814
129 euros, one to be issued in 2009 and the other in 2010.”
The
COM claimed:
“Not
respecting the timetable fixed by the above mentioned law, it is
only on December 20th,
2012 the Prefet of Region/Guadeloupe issued the first “Titre de
perception” as to recuperate the years 2008 and 2009 debt due to
the State (France).”
The COM of
St-Barthelemy pleaded that: “article 6 of the 2008 LFR by not
respecting the rights acquired by articles LO. 6271-4 and 6271-5 of
the organic law and article 104 of the 2007 LFR, was in infraction
with article 16 of the 1789 “declaration des droits de l'homme et
du citoyen”
On November 2013 the
Administrative Court of Basse-Terre transmitted the QPC of the COM
of St-Barthelemy to the “Conseil d'Etat”, the latter turned it
over to the “Conseil Constitutionnel”
The “Conseil
Constitutionnel” in a decision,
concluded that the modification of article 104 of the 2007 LFR by
article 6 of the 2008 LFR was justified and not contrary to any
rights guaranteed by the Constitution, and therefore pronounced a
nonsuit
This decision of the “Conseil Constitutionel” was
in substance grounded on the fact that the evaluation of the budget
of transfer of competences to the COM at the time of the drafting of
the Organic law as well as of article104 of the 2007 LFR, were
established in temporary evaluations and only became definitive
after the mission of the CCEC was accomplished and therefore the COM
St-Barthelemy is not founded to pretend to the benefit of acquired
right guaranteed by article 16 of the 1789 Declaration.
The least I can
say about this decision of the “Conseil Constitutionnel” is that
the Court has limited its verdict to the sole arguments of COM
St-Barth.
But knowing the history of France decolonization
policy, bringing forward the principle of financial neutrality in
the transfer of Competences to St-Martin and St-Barth in article 104
of the 2007 LFR, is to be considered a fundamental principle, that
should never be characterized as a casualness based on the fact that
the evaluation of the charges was temporary. This is purely
nonsense,
The evaluation
of these charges even if considered temporary, was nevertheless done
by a CCEC composed of members exclusively appointed by the State,
therefore may be qualified as temporary but never as casual.
In
any case, placing the principle of financial neutrality on the
negotiation table when the budget of transfer of competences was
temporary and to suddenly take it off the table and to substitute it
by France's traditional decolonization policy consisting in imposing
on liberated colonies a debt burden as payment for colonization
benefits, this after the COM are set in place and the evaluation of
charges becomes definitive, can never be justice.
(note that this
decision confirm well that all evaluation of charges transferred
were definitively fixed and closed by the CCEC since the publication
of article 6 of the 2008 LFR. Therefore this Consultant Commission
had no further legal existence in St-Martin, no legal power or
competence at the date of January 13th,
2011 to decide on the validity of new charges brought up by the
“Ministre du Budget” against St-Martin and that was to benefit
the Departement/Guadeloupe and indebted St-Martin.
NOW
THE BIG QUESTION IS:
WHY
NO ONE HAS TO THIS DAY DENOUNCED THIS YEARLY DEBT BURDEN AS
GROUNDED UPON A REPREHENSIBLE “SUPERCHERIE” ?
The answer to this
question obliges us to recall the actions surrounding the setting
into place of the newly created COM:
The
COM St-Martin and COM St-Barthelemy were officially created not as
duly they should have been, by a constitutional law but by an
Organic Law promulgated on February 21st,
2007,
Consequently, it is only indirectly in the French
constitution that it may be refer to St-Martin and St-Barth as
French Overseas Collectivity, but there is no specific article
stating the accession of these two former Communes of Guadeloupe to
the status of COM.
The same can be said about COM St-Martin
at the level of the E.U., France had never officially declared to
the C.E.(Conseil Europeen) the change of status of St-Martin from a
Commune of Guadeloupe to an autonomous COM.
Indirectly we
find St-Martin under the status of a COM in the books of the TFUE
(Traite de Fonctionnement de l'U.E.), but this is not the
legislative body of the E.U. And the C.E., the real legislative
body, is under no obligation to ground its decisions on the work of
the TFUE.
On the contrary St-Barth is officially declared at
the level of the C.E. And the E.U. Legislation was modified to
accommodate the change of status of St-Barth as a COM and also under the E.U.
Status of a PTOM., but a complete silence regarding St-Martin is observed.
After
the July 1st,
and July 8th,
2007 councillors elections, on July15th,
2007, the first Territorial Council was voted in with for president
Louis Constant FLEMING.
By the dispositions of the February
21st,
2007 Organic law, the transfer of competences to the newly created
Overseas Collectivity was to be officially effective only from
January 1st,
2008. In other words up to this date the Territorial Council elected
July 15th,
was supposedly running under the budget and competences of the only
Commune of St-Martin,
For the drafting of the Organic law
and the transfer of competences scheduled for January 1st,2008,
a Consultant Commission (Commission Consultative d'Evaluation des
Charges /CCEC) was put in place at the level of the préfet of
Guadeloupe region and composed of members exclusively chosen by the
préfet.
The
work of this first Consultant Commission was said to be temporary
awaiting the definitive evaluation of a new local CCEC put in place
at the level of each COM and composed
of elected members of the concerned COM, members of the
Department/Guadeloupe, members of the Region/Guadeloupe and
representatives of the State, this in
conformity with
article LO. 6371-6 of the CGCT,
On December 25th,
2007 was promulgates a “Loi des Finances Rectificative (LFR)” of
which article 104 was consecrated to the conditions of transfer of
resources and charges generated by the transfer of competences to
the newly created COM.
The dispositions of this LFR also
emphasized on the principle of financial neutrality to be observed
in the compensation Resources/Charges by imputation exclusively on
the State's compensation account, used as the neutralizer.
It
was clearly expressed with no ambiguity that any excess or
insufficient resources in the process would be charged exclusively
to the State's compensation (France) account.
However, a
December 2007 statement established by the St-Martin's CCEC in view
of the December 2007 LFR, presented the following Compensation
situation:
A compensation deficit (DGC) in favor of COM St-Martin at the sum of
5 103 895,00 €
On the contrary for
St-Barth a “DGC” debt in favor of France at the sum of
5
676 744,00 €
Subsequently by article 6 of a December 30th,
2008 LFR modifying the last alinea of the 3 of the II of article 104
of the 2007 LFR, St-Barth was place before the accomplished fact
that the principle of financial neutrality had been abolished by
this new LFR, in the following terms:
Article 6 states:
indications
in the last alinea of the 3 of II of article 104 :“to the charge
of the State's account”
is now replaced by the indication: “Would
be subject to a “titre de perception issued every year by the
prefet of Region Guadeloupe during the month of January of the
considered year, for payment by the latest 6 months after the
issued date”
This
article 6 further stated that the year 2008 debt of St-Barth will be
subject to: two
“Titre de perception” one in 2009 and the other in 2010, each
for the sum of 2 814 129 euros.
All
facts indicate that this modification of the principle of neutrality
was exclusively intended to COM St-Barth.A
complete silence is observed in this December 30th,
2008 LFR regarding COM St-Martin compensation.
Nothing
is mention for COM St-Martin, that we know contrarily to St-Barth,
the DGC showed the State's indebted in favor of St-Martin for the
sum of: 5
103 895 euros
In
protest against this U-Turn of France, we find:
The President of
the “Departement/Guadeloupe”, Jacques GILLOT, complaining of
being robbed of over 18 millions euros from in cuts of the
“Departement” different allowances (Dotations)
And Victorin
LUREL, Deputy and President of the Region/Guadeloupe, also
complaining, struck by surprise in finding that the different
allowances (dotations) granted by the State were reduced by over 5
millions euros.
The beginning of COM
St-Martin protest against this debt burden:
It
is only by an April 22nd,
2011 Ministerial decree followed by an April 19th,
2012 ministerial “Circulaire” that St-Martin was seemingly
indirectly informed that readjustment operation for over-evaluation
of the charges of the department “Incendie et Secours”
transferred from the “Département/Guadeloupe”
to the COM St-Martin has generated an increase of the DGD of the
Département/Guadeloupe
and subsequently an equivalent reduction of St-Martin global
Compensation allowances (DGC).
This reduction was evaluated
at the sum of 874 449 euros in 2006 value, converted to the sum of:
914 995,00 euros in 2008 value and reduced to 634
126,00 €
after deduction of a credit due of
280 868,00 €.
It
is stated that this readjustment of charges was voted upon and
approved by the St-Martin's CCEC by the majority of its members in
their sitting of January 13th,
2011.
If
not mistaken, the character of perpetual yearly reevaluated debt is
not expressly stated in none of the above mentioned acts. Therefore
all seems to be in conformity with the dispositions of article L.O.
6371-5 of the CGCT.
And I found no mention of any perpetual
yearly reevaluated debt burden on St-Martin in none of the yearly
following “Loi de Finances Rectificative (LFR)” modifying
article 104 of the 2007 LFR.
On the contrary St-Barth is recalled in
every year LFR since 2008 up to my last verification of the 2015
LFR.
Note that this 634 126,00 euros compensations debit
resulting from the readjustment of the sole Fire Department of which
competences had been transferred from the Departement/Guadeloupe to
the COM St-Martin, by the dispositions of the Organic law, could not
be singled out but legally integrated in the general global
compensation “dotations” account, resulting from the transfer of
competences from all 4 institutions: the State, the Region, the
Departement, and the Commune.
And as demonstrated above this global compensation account was presenting a balance due to St-Martin by France.
And
from my point of view, this explains to me the raison of the
December 26th,
2013, decision of the Conseil d'Etat to turn over before the
Administrative Court of Paris the July 5th,
2011, the “requête”
of COM St-Martin on the grounds of the: irregularity
character of the April 22nd,2011
ministerial decree.
We know that officially this CCEC had to be
composed of elected members of the COM St-Martin, representatives of
the Region/Guadeloupe, representatives of the Departement/Guadeloupe
and representatives of the State(France)
But here are some
questions:
Was this CCEC
effectively operational locally here in St-Martin?
Who were the
elected members representatives of COM St-Martin?
Had the COM
St-Martin ever informed the public on the work of this Consultant
Commission (CCEC) or had questioned the modalities, methods or rules
observed to achieve an accurately and definitive evaluation of cost
of the transfer of competences from all four institutions concerned
(State, Region, Departement, Commune) to the newly created Overseas
Collectivity?
How could the
readjustment of the charges of the Fire Department leading to this
634 126,00 euros debt be approved by this St-Martin's CCEC in its
sitting of January 13th, 2011 and the COM St-Martin
pretends today to be surprisedly infringed.
All informations
gathered, it is truly not misleading to conclude that the existence
of this officially called “St-Martin CCEC” here in St-Martin was
but fictive.
The evident truth
is that if there was a new local CCEC created, in actual fact it
operated identically as the previous one that was said to be
temporary and composed of high ranking civil servants chosen by the
Prefet of Region Guadeloupe and sitting under his authority.
An
other evident truth is that , after being caught by surprise,
Jacques Gillot and Victorin LUREL joined force with this supposed
new local CCEC or with the State representatives to recover what
they had previously lost in the 2008 transferred budget.
So
it is fair to say that in the reality of facts, this new supposed
local CCEC operated in the form of a coalition of State's
representatives joined with representatives of the Region/Guadeloupe
and representatives of the Departement/Guadeloupe, all three sitting
before an empty seat, that of COM St-Martin
I may refer to
the declaration of Mr. Dominique LACROIX, a former “Prefet
Delegue” for St-Martin & St-Barth during an audition by the
“mission d'information” on April 17th, 2014
concerning the definitive evaluation of the charges transferred to
COM St-Martin, he declared:
“The evaluation of the
charges was a particular complex question for the services of the
State, the Region and the Departement, for this reason, this
evaluation can be imperfect.....
I also think that the
Collectivity was lacking the expertise capacity to challenge the
propositions presented to them by the State, the Region and the
Departement.
Placing face to face on one side a Collectivity
at its beginnings and on the other side the State, the Region and
the Departement, could have never lead to balanced dialogue”
We need to know who were the elected representatives of COM
St-Martin sitting in this called St-Martin local CCEC and we need to
know if they were present in the sitting of January 13th,
2011 when these new transferred charges by which St-Martin is
condemned today to a perpetual yearly debt in favor of France, were
voted upon and approved.
HOW
CAN WE EXPLAIN THE U-TURN OF FRANCE FROM A PROMISE OF
FINANCIAL NEUTRALITY TO A DRASTIC IMPOSITION OF A PERPETUAL YEARLY
DEBT BURDEN
There is always a reason behind a sudden drastic change in people's
behaviors, even in the behaviors of a colonialist minded Nation as
France.
It is no secret that the daily fate of we natives in
the French Overseas territories often depends on wether the appointed
representative of the State, the Prefet is a good-humored person or
an ill-humored person.
It is also no secret that all the folks involved in this struggle for
a change of status did not had the necessary expertise capacity to
conceive and formulate in clear legislative and constitutional terms
the grounds on which they wanted this new COM St-Martin to be build
upon
It was all a fake autonomy dream in which each individual
egocentrically was solely contemplating his personal potentiality to
rise to a high rank function in government locally as well as
nationally in Paris.
But it is also true that even the State's representatives, were
surprised before the most irrational and irresponsible measures taken
by the newly elected Council of the COM St-Martin, under the
presidency of Louis Constant Fleming.
Measures taken by the COM while it was yet supposedly functioning
on temporary evaluated funds
The COM of St-Martin and of
St-Barthelemy were created by the Febuary 21st,
2007 Organic law, with constitutional effect from January 1st,
2007, but it is only from January 1st,
2008, that officially the transfer of competences was to be
effective.
This means that it is only from January 1st,
2008 that the newly created COM to officially operate fully as a
Region, a Departement and a Commune with in addition certain State's
competences handed down under the terms of the Organic law.
Also financially the budget of
the COM with the evaluation of the charges and resources transferred
was only going into effect from January 1st,
2008.
In other words before this date and from the July 15th,
2007 the COM St-Martin was supposedly yet functioning within the
budget of the Commune.
We further know that St-Barth had
full financial autonomy from day one, on the contrary, St-Martin was
not to have full financial autonomy before January 1st,
2012.
Elections of councillors of the COM were held on July
1st,
and 8th,
2007 and on July 15th,
2007 St-Martin elected its Territorial Council with for president Mr.
Louis Constant FLEMING.
Now three factors must be clear:
First
as said above, the Territorial Council even is in place from July
15th 2007,
it was not to be invested into its new competences and to dispose
of the funds of its running expenditures transferred budget as a
COM before January 1st,
2008.
Secondly
even being fully in its function as a COM from January 1st,
2008, financially it was functioning upon a temporary evaluation of
the charges and resources in compensation of the competences
transferred.
A St-Martin CCEC was in charge to calculate
the definitive evaluation of the charges of the competences
transferred.In short this means that from January
1st
2008 up to the definitive evaluation of the charges by the
St-Martin CCEC, the COM St-Martin was officially functioning under
a temporary evaluated budget of which outcome yet remains in the
hands of the State.
Thirdly,
the COM-St-Martin was not to have its financial autonomy before
January 1st,
2012.
Considering these three factors, it is obvious that from January 1st,
2008 up to at the very least December 31st,2011, the newly
create COM St-Martin was to be confronted with a period of financial
uncertainty, awaiting both its financial autonomy and the definitive
evaluation of the running expenditures and necessary resources needed to run of the
newly created COM starting off with the new transferred competences.
During such a period of financial
uncertainty, what kind of leader in his good mind would have taken
any budgetary initiative of the nature to financially compromise a
good and sincere supervision of the financial situation resulting
from the 2008 transferred of competences budget to the newly created COM St-Martin,
and also the definitive evaluation by the CCEC of the charges of the
transferred competences and of the necessary resources needed in
compensation?
Contrary to the above stated common sense, at the same time that this called
St-Martin Consultant Commission (CCEC), was officially supposedly
carrying out its mission locally in St-Martin and in spite of the
fact COM St-Martin was not yet granted financial autonomy,
We find the president Louis
constant FLEMING, engaged in taxation reforms that by the least one
can say,were deeply confusing and compromising to the good evaluation
of the cost of the transferred competences and the necessary
resources in compensation.
Already on a November 21st,
2007 deliberation, the Territorial Council voted:
For a general 40% reduction on revenue taxes,
This knowing
that 44% (14 465 000 euros) of the resources transferred in taxation
consist of State's taxation on revenues (IRPP, IS, ISF) evaluated
upon the year 2005 taxation, not at the effective sum collected but
at their theoretic amount.
This State's taxation transferred
was never effectively collected by the State, because the potential
payers in majority are the socio-professional, and everyone on the
island know their history when come to this category of residents
fulfilling their fiscal duties and obligations
And also
knowing well that of the total 36,6 millions resources in taxation
transferred in compensation of the charges transferred, 16, 6
millions (45,4%) was officially recognized as potentially
non-collectable.
And for the abolition of the solidarity taxes on great wealth.
As
a result of Louis Constant premature taxation exoneration to the
most wealthy,
For the year 2008 the COM had benefited from
the State of a tax relief compensation as a guaranty for unpaid tax
so the difference between the 32,6 millions euros in taxation
transferred as resources and the taxation effectively collected was
insignificant,
But from the year 2009, because of COM
St-Martin granted fiscal autonomy, this tax relief compensation was
abolished, and already for the fiscal year 2009, of the 32,6
millions in taxation transferred in 2008, the COM St-Martin barely
collected 25, 6 millions euros, an approximate 23% drop, not to be
anymore compensated.
As palliative to president LCF premature
fiscal regime set in place, from the year 2009 we find the COM
St-Martin involved in the creation of all sort of local taxations of
an unprecedented nature, squeezing the economic poor with
unprecedented taxations and fraudulent impositions and fraudulent
calculations.
By the above scheme directed exclusively
against the unprivileged social strata, the taxation collected by
the COM for the year 2010 suddenly increased from the sum of 32,6
millions euros in 2008 to the sum of 68,3 millions euros, an
increase quite 210% compared to the taxation transferred as
resources in 2008 and this exclusively on the head of the poor
natives of St-Martin with a home and a little undivided house lot of
land inherited from their deceased forefathers.
We find also
Louis Constant FLEMING, prematurely installing services that were
said to be handed down from the State to the COM, such as vehicles
registrations. This service immediately set in place even before
the 1st, of January 2008, not awaiting the transfer of
vehicle users files from the Sous-Prefecture, was to be very
penalizing to vehicle users that find themselves under the
obligation to start over anew all the registration formalities to
reconstitute a second file to that already in the hands of the
Sous-Prefet.
When it would have so much less penalizing for
these poor people to wait until their files were turned over by the
Sous-Prefecture to the COM, compulsory after January 1st,
2008
Then find him restoring a road tax, and proudly declaring “This
new road tax is a major step forward in harmonizing with Dutch
St-Maarten”Should we
have to remind LCF that Dutch St-Maarten don't pay “taxes
foncieres” or “taxes d'habitation”
Remember
this road tax, the formerly known as “Vignette Auto” created in
France in 1956 to finance a solidarity fund in favor of the Old-aged
population, was totally abolished since the year 2000 in France and
Overseas French regions.
To these random tax policies, we
must add the enforcement on the newly created COM of the rule of 5
years of residence requested for unknown reason by our elected
leaders and prescribed in article LO. 6314-4 of the Organic law and
as result, has created two categories of fiscal residence within the
Collectivity of St-Martin:
- All persons residing in St-Martin before July 15th,
2007, only this category falls under the taxation regime of the
Collectivity and inters into its budget
- All persons settled in St-Martin after July 15th, 2007
and count less than 5 years of continuous residency.
This
category, if the subject to tax previously was residing in
metropolitan France or in any other French Overseas Territory, he is
subject to metropolitan taxation regime and all taxation revenues
collected from him in St-Martin supply the budget of the State and
not the budget of the Collectivity of St-Martin.
However,
article LO. 6380-1 of the CGCT make provision that the State is to
pay to the Collectivity a compensation fund for the loss suffered as
a result of the rules applied to this last category of
residents.
The least one can assume is that these premature,
irrational and irresponsible measures of president of President
Louis Constant Fleming were not of the nature to instill confidence
in the mind of the representatives of the State to intrust the COM
with the State's money.
And we see the State representative,
the prefet, 100% more present in the run of the public affairs of
St-Martin administrated as a COM than when it was administrated as a
Commune of Guadeloupe.
We can assume that all the reductions
operated upon the State's “dotations” to COM St-Martin as well
as the reprehensible financial hoax perpetrated by the State in the
evaluation of the cost of the competences transferred, the perpetual
debt burden, all seems to be motivated by the State's need to put
money in the hands of the prefet as to finance his direct
interference in the run of the affairs of St-Martin.
We can
remember the prefet declaration to the Daily Herald “They are a
bunch of irresponsible persons..”
In an October 19th,2005
declaration of General Councillor Louis Constant Fleming we quote:
“The final draft of the organic law for St-Martin had received
a final touching up in Paris on October 7th,
and a subsequent inter-ministerial meeting on the draft three days
later had gone very well........The first five year mandate for the
new Collectivity status for St-Martin, officially beginning January
1, 2008 would involve a cleaning-up process as the Collectivite
inherits the financial situation of the
municipality.........St-Martin will be granted full autonomy on
January 1st,2012,
St-Barths will have full autonomy as of january 1st,
2007.After
being elected president of the COM, he did exactly the contrary in
his hurry to fulfill his electoral campaign deals primarily with the
European socio-professional settled on St-Martin, the known the
fiscal paradise.
To conclude
with president Louis Constant FLEMING random fiscal legislation, it
was so obvious that one did not need education but simple common
sense to understand that the said “Fiscal autonomy” granted to
the newly created COM was no more than a fierce “Supercherie à
la crème française”.
This granted fiscal autonomy as
well as the entire modality of evaluation of the compensation of the
competences transferred, can be compared to one traveling on a 30
days vacation leaving back home a bird in a cage with a daily
measured potion of food and water calculated on a just 30 days
potions, the bird has its consumption autonomy in its cage, free to
decide on its own free will on its daily consumption, ignoring that
his master only provided in the cage a calculated 30 days food
ration.
It only take a few days for that happy-go-lucky bird
to find itself in despair with nether food nor water and finally
perished before its master returned from his 30 days vacation.
This
bird in cage consumption autonomy characterize perfectly the called
fiscal autonomy granted to the COM, an autonomy calculated to lead
the COM straight to its death
Resources
in form of taxation transferred represented 49% of the global total
resources transferred. Since the transfer budget was limited solely
to running expenditures, this means that 49% of the running
expenditures were to be financed by the resources transferred in
the form of taxation.
Therefore a responsible management of
the budget of the newly created COM will consist in recognizing the
fact that in spite of having fiscal autonomy, the newly created COM
did not had the freedom to lower taxes at the very least before its
budgetary incomes had attained a certain autonomous financial
velocity.
And to the earliest this would have taken 5 years
after creation of the COM or never if one should consider the tax
evasion practices by the most wealthy on the island and their
leeching socio-economical mentality.
We do not have in
St-Martin socio-professionals contributing to the wealth of the
island, enriching the island economic capital by reinvesting part of
the profits they accumulate, but socio-professionals sucking like
leeches all our island wealth potentialities and actual resources
with objective to invest in foreign countries in particular within
the Caribbean and the Americas.
There
is no doubt that these premature and irresponsible measures taken in
hurry by Louis Constant FLEMING, were instigated in particular by
the socio-professionals in thirst to legalize their fiscal paradise
status in St-Martin and who were holding him under pressure to
fulfill his electoral campaign deals.
THE
ORIGINAL PRICE PAID FOR THIS CHANGE OF STATUS
It is clear that the COM St-Martin with a population of over 37 000
inhabitants budgetary problems result from the irrational and
reprehensible modalities and methods by which the cost of the
transferred competences was evaluated, not ignoring also the
incompetence of our elected representatives to guarantee the
functional viability of the newly created COM.
We can but
deplore the disgraceful submissiveness of our politicians,
advocators of this change of status, not only to the modalities of
evaluation of the transferred competences but primarily to all the
preconditions set by the representative of the State, the Préfet
of Region Guadeloupe prior to opening talks on the change of status.
From the years
1999 to 2006, the Commune of St-Martin was forced under budgetary
constraint as preconditions to the opening of negotiation on the
change of status
The
administrative
budget of the commune of St-Martin was already established in 1997
to the sum of 99 millions euros (650 millions francs) (42 M.€
allocated to running expenses 57 M.€ to investment),
And
the consolidated budget including its annexed departments was fixed
at 104,5 millions euros.
This is to say the newly created
COM St-Martin 2008 budget set at 74,6 millions euros, was
established at a sum representing about 75% of the sole Commune of
St-Martin 1997 budget.
This
enormous budgetary gap can be largely imputed to an
unscrupulous manipulation of the budget of the Commune of St-Martin
between 1999 and 2006, in order to reduce to the possible minimum
the cost of transfer of the competences of the Commune to the COM in
creation.
The proof that the 2008 transfer of competences budget was simply
grounded upon fictive figures is that, we find the following year
budget, the year 2009 budget of the COM St-Martin, established at
the sum of 122 millions euros (running expenditures: 88 millions and
investments 34 millions)
And today, the year 2016 budget is
established at the sum of 212 million euros (running expenditures:
137 millions and investments 65 millions)
This shows a 174%
increase from 2008 to 2009 and over 284% increase from 2008 to
2016.
To compare COM St-Martin 2016 budget with our
neighbors:
Dutch St-Maarten local government running expenditures budget for
2016 is fixed at 224 millions euros (439 millions ANG)
Anguilla
local government (16 500 inhabitants), running expenditure budget
for 2016 is fixed at 77 millions euros (EC$ 226 millions)
A
budget turned into an unscrupulous accordion
In 1999 the
Préfet of Guadeloupe seized the “Chambre Régional des comptes”
claiming that the 1997 budget leading up to the 1999 budget of the
Commune of St-Martin, in spite of an apparent balance were
presenting manifest insincerities.
The
most significant insincerity was the fact that the budget included
in receipts from SEMSAMAR a sum of 6,5 millions euros (41 millions
francs) of which the origin of the debt could not be proven or
legally justified
The “Chambre Régional des comptes”
reported that the Commune budget accused between 1997 and 1999, a
cumulated deficit of over 15 millions euros (100 millions francs),
representing 1/3 of the Commune effective budget receipts.
As a result of this
fact, the “Chambre Régional des Comptes” recommended to the
Commune a set of austerity measures
The
Mayor and his surroundings advocators for a change of status, were
under obligation to play a budgetary accordion manipulation at the
tune fixed by the préfet and the “Chambre Régional des
Comptes”
Following the instructions recommended by the
“Chambre Régionale des Comptes”, the Commune 2000 budget
presented to the préfet of Guadeloupe Jean-Francois Carenco, was
established at the sum of 68 millions euros: (35 M.€ allocated to
running expenses and 33 M.€ allocated to investment.)
It
was declared a balanced budget.A
budget reduced to quite 35% of the 1999 budget and 69% of the 1997.
It was declared a balanced budget.
To achieve this seemingly
irrational budgetary drainage, on one hand the Commune decided to
transform the “Water and sewage department” (régie des Eaux &
assainissement”) accusing a deficit of 7 M€ , the “Port
department” and the “Airport department” into 3 autonomous
establishments distinct from the main budget of the Commune, each
presenting separated autonomous budgets.
And on the other, in
complicity with the State's representatives, it was decided not to
budget certain compulsory expenses on the concerned year budget but
to defer them to other years.
In
an August 19th,
1999 edition of the the St-Martin's Week journal, I quote: ”Local
finances are no more in the red but a lot worst, close to lapsing
into a coma” Yet
this was not enough for the State Government to open negotiation for
a change of status so much desired by all our elected
representatives.
Therefore the Préfet of Guadeloupe with the
help of the “Chambre Régional des Comptes”, put the Commune
under pressure as precondition before sitting to the change of
status negotiating table, to establish a budget totally stripped of
all of its annexed departments.
Under this pressure, we find
the Commune presenting a 2006 budget established at the sum of 37
millions euros, reduced exclusively to sole running expenditures of
the main services of the Commune, and with no investment
budgeted.
To have an accurate judgement, one will have to go
14 years back from 2006 in the history of the Commune to find a
budget at that level, the 1992 budget of the Commune was established
at the sum of 36 M€ .
The proof of the insincerity of this
2006 budget, is that on March the 22nd,
2007, we find the Commune voting on the 2007 budget amounting to the
sum of 91,3 millions euros (53,4 M€ in running expenditures and
37,9 M€ in investment.)
I may refer to deputy Mayor of
St-Martin Jean-Luc Hamlet in a July 26th,
2006 speech at the Belair Community Center declared:“...I
Acknowledge that the financial difficulties the Commune faces caused
a major stumbling block with Government
during negotiations for transfer to the new status..............But
the Commune's central budgets had been cleaned up........... Unlike
St-Barths, St-Martin will not be granted financial autonomy until
2012, its financial situation has been under the supervision of
Guadeloupe's Regional accounting Chamber since 2000.......A recent
study indicated that in the next 10 to 15 years, St-Martin would
need a 360 million euros injection from a so called compensation
fund....money that would have
to
be provided by the State....... There was a risk of asking for too
much which could see the organic law being rejected”
.
As
a result, in the transfer of competences the cost of the competences
of the Commune transferred to the COM St-Martin were evaluated at
the sum of 48,5 M€,
of a total of 74,6 M€ transferred, in clear, the Commune
represents 65% of the budget of the newly created COM St-Martin
leaving a shared 35% evaluation cost for the competences transferred
from the State, the Region and the Departement.
This
obvious undervaluation of the cost of the competences transferred
from the State, the Region and the Departement, was to be worsen by
an April 22nd,
2011 decree indicating new evaluations, said to be the definitive
evaluation of the charges, in this decree, we find the transferred
cometences of the Commune increased from 48,5 millions euros to the
sum of 61, 2 millions euros
of a total transferred budget amounting to 82,6 millions euros.
In
this last evaluation the transferred competences of the Commune
represent over 74% of COM St-Martin global transferred budget.
This
means that the competences of the Departement/Guadeloupe, of the
Region/Guadeloupe and from the State are evaluated in cost at only
26% of the running expenditures of the COM St-Martin.
St-Martin's
budgetary tribulations under the reign of Frantz GUMBS
There
is an old African adage that goes: “Who
drinks wine for supper wants water for breakfast”
After
unscrupulously manipulating the budget of the Commune from 1999 to
2006 under the pressure of the State as preconditions to a change of
status from a Commune of Guadeloupe to a said to be autonomous
Collectivity, the COM St-Martin with its 37 000 inhabitants, had
been handed down in 2008 a budget in running expenditures far below
the budget in running expenditures of Anguilla 6500
inhabitants.
The COM St-Martin started out in 2008 with a
fictive budget, a budget designed to never achieve functional
viability.
The evaluation of the transferred competences to
the COM St-Martin has no common measures compared to the true
financial need to run the heavy administrative structure of a COM as
it is defined by the Organic law.
Nonchalantly accepted by the elected leaders of the COM
St-Martin, this 2008 transferred competences budget, was to naturally serve as budget of reference by the State representative, the prefet to sanction any budgetary
slippage committed by the COM.
It is therefore in this budgetary context that under the reign of
Frantz Gumbs, the COM St-Martin 2011 budget established at the
sum of 107,3 millions euros (75,7 M€ in running expenditures and
31,6 M€ in investments.), voted and approved on March 24th,
2011
was by an April 28th,
2011 decision, seized by Mr. Jacques Simmonet, “préfet
Délégué of St-Martin/St-Barth” and placed under the supervision
of the “Chambre Régionale des Comptes”
The Préfet
Jacques Simmonet declared: “The
budget was insincere, and suggested that the lowering or abolishing
of certain taxes under the presidency of Louis Constant Fleming had
not been in the Collectivity best interest..”
Mr.
Frantz Gumbs president of the COM St-Martin declared: “The
seizure was inevitable and understandable. It is true that between
2008 and 2011 our compulsory operating expenditures have risen
exponentially while revenues have not, thus making it increasingly
difficult to obtain a balanced budget. That's why in 2010 we decided
to drastically reduce our expenditures”
It
is interesting to note that this budget voted by COM St-Martin on
March 24th,
2011and seized by the Préfet, was accusing only the sum of 75,7
millions euros in running expenditures, practically
the same sum in running expenditures in the 2008 transfer of
competences budget (74 609 972 €) published by the 2007 LFR
And
practically at the same date of the seizer by the prefet of the
Frantz Gumbs budget, should we quote figures published by the April 22nd,
2011 ministerial decree, we find these same 2008 transferred
competences charges (running expenditures) amounting to the sum of
82 595 044,00 euros, said to be the definitive evaluation.
Note that Frantz Gumbs 2011 budget in running
expenditures amounted only to 75,6 millions euros.
Contrary to all logic, in spite
of the fact that this definitive evaluation is over 111% of the 2008 transferred of
competences charges as published in the April 22nd,
2011 ministerial decree and subsequently in the April 19th,
2012 “Circulaire”, St-Martin is declared indebted to France
for the sum of 634 126, 00 euros, debt to be declared later a
perpetual yearly reevaluated debt burden.
More interesting to
note also, is that it is indicated in the same above mentioned
ministerial “Circulaire” that the above mentioned sum of 82
595 044,00 euros in transferred competences charges was voted
upon and approved by the COM St-Martin CCEC in their sitting of
January 13th,
2011 and published in the “Journal Officiel” of Mai 4th,
2011.
In
clear language at the same date that the Frantz Gumbs 2011 budget was under seizure for insincerity by the préfet for a sum
of 75,7 millions euros in running expenditures, the minister of
Budget was publishing as definitive evaluation of the 2008 transferred competences charges the sum of
82,6; 11% superior to Frantz Gumbs 2011 budget.
In
short, the running expenditures for the 2011 budget of COM St-Martin
declared insincere, was approximately 11% inferior compared to the 2008
running expenditures evaluated by the Minister of Budget and
published the same date the COM St-Martin budget was seized by the
Préfet for insincerity.
An other obscurity in the run of
the budget of the COM St-Martin between 2008 and 2012, is that in
spite of the fact that the said definitive evaluation of the
transferred charge amounts to an increase of over 111% compared to
the 2008 transfer charges evaluation, we find the State Bleeding
St-Martin for a total of 6 971 268,00 € said to be recuperation of
excess resources transferred in 2008. And on the back a 634 126 €
perpetual yearly debt burden.
To conclude, We know that
contrary to St-Barth, St-Martin was not intended by the organic law
to have full financial autonomy before January 1st,
2012, seemingly during this period and even beyond, the minister of
the budget was running his budget of St-Martin in an arbitrary
manner with not the least elementary cohesion with the local
management of of the budget of the COM St-Martin and was executing
arbitrary analytic readjustments in complete disregard of the global
compensations “dotations” account that was presenting a deficit in favor of COM St-Martin not compensated.
Therefore the
declared excess in resources transferred to St-Martin and
recuperated during the years 2008 to 2012 and to which is added this 634
126,00 euros perpetual yearly debt burden, remains from my point of
view, a reprehensible hoax.
Would
it not be a worthy move of the COM St-Martin to close down this Fire
department on the French Side, returning it to Guadeloupe and sign a
Fire assistance cooperation agreement with Dutch St-Martin as to get
this perpetual yearly debt burden lifted?
Because having the
charges of the running expenditures of this department and with on
the back a yearly debt burden of over 634 126 € is simply a too
abusive penalty to accept for any government seeking sustainable
development.
Unprecedented
impositions and Fraudulent calculations instituted by the COM
St-Martin.
We
know that for this year 2016, the fiscal receipt budgeted amounts
to 81,01 millions euros, an increase of 249% compared to the 32,6
millions in taxation resources transferred in the 2008 transfer of
competences budget.
An increase of 249% in spite of all the
tax exemptions, exonerations and tax pay-back voted in favor of the
wealthy. So hereafter are some of the taxation measures taken by the
COM St-Martin to assure this exorbitant increase in less than 7
fiscal years.
Under
the National taxation regime, poor people with no other revenue than
the rent of their personal individual home or the undivided
inherited home from deceased parents, were never imposed to revenue
tax for rent money collected.
In spite of the fact that this
type of revenue is by law taxable, in the reality of facts it was
not enforced against the above category of residents for the simple
raison that the sum in rent collected felt in general within the
bracket of revenue exonerated.
So this category of tax
payers was only subject to property tax (Taxes foncières).
In
the regime imposed by the COM St-Martin, this category is now
subject to both revenue tax for rent collected and to property
tax.
And this revenue tax is imposed at 15% of the gross
amount of rent collected, when legally in the absence of a
declaration of the effective renting charges to be deducted, the
gross rent should be subject to 30% reduction to determine the net
taxable.
On the back of this 15% taxation it is imposed on
this category of resident also a 2,5% taxation called “Prélèvements
sociaux .
By
the law property tax (taxes foncières) the taxable base should be
50% of the “valeur locative” indicated on the “relevé de
propriété”. This “valeur locative” has nothing to do with
the actual rent collected but is the result of a very complex
indexation calculation at national level and published yearly by the
State,
Not respection the 50% deduction rule, the COM
St-Martin applies their 47.30% taxation rate on 100% of the
indicated “Valeur locative”
An
other fraudulent practice of COM St-Martin is against retirement
pensions that consist partly of a sum paid as social security
general régime pension fund and partly by a sum paid as Old-aged
solidarity fund.
By the law only the part paid as social
security general régime pension is imposable, the part paid as
Old-aged solidarity fund is exonerated.
The COM St-Martin
imposes these poor residents on the totality of their pension.
The
decision to withhold 30% in the name of revenue tax on the
solidarity revenue (RSA) paid to resident facing insecure means of
living, residents with no income, this category of solidarity
allowance is called “RSA Socle” compred to another category
called “RSA Activité” allocated as a complementary revenue to
residents with a salary below the minimum wage, this last category
seemingly remains on the State budget and therefore is exempted from
the 30% taxation.,
Considering the French national
legislation, the EU social legislation and the fundamental
principles of the French Republic, there is absolutely no way that
this 30% taxation on solidarity fund can be legal.
The préfet
seized the “Conseil d'Etat” on the matter accusing COM
-St-Martin of “Abuse of authority” , but the case was
dismissed on the grounds of the COM St-Martin fiscal autonomy.
Now
the people ought to know that contrary to the rumours, the financing
of this RSA is supposed not to be at the charge of the Collectivity
but included in the “Dotation forfaitaire” or the “Dotation
Globale de Compensation” paid by the State to the COM.
This
RSA, enforced in France since 1/06/2009 was introduced in the French
Overseas regions from the 01/01/2011 in replacement of single
parents “allocations”(API) and the famous RMI.
Both were
exclusively charged to the State's budget, therefore the transfer of
the competences of the RSA to the Overseas Regions was also
accompanied with the transfer of the necessary resources to rid all
burden on local budgets.
If
this is not the case for COM St-Martin, only its incompetence is to
blame.
What I know and believe was but a well suggested trap
is that by a June 26th, 2014 deliberation of the
Territorial Council, COM St-Martin requested the competence to
legislate on the RSA
This competence was granted on an
extended period of two years, by a July 16th, 2015 vote
of the National Assembly in Paris.
What I can affirm is that
it will be but cherished illusions for one to believe that Paris
will grant to some Blacks in the Caribbean the freedom to legislate
on the distribution of welfare benefits and will still pay the bill.
The
systematic imposition of a 100 euros just to obtain a declaration of
non-imposition for residents exonerated of revenue tax due to to the
fact that their revenue falls within the exonerated bracket.
And
this 100 euros tax is cumulated every year, meaning even if you did
not requested a non-imposition declaration for five years when you
go request one you find yourself confronted with a 500 euros
back-payment to pay off before they deliver to you the declaration
for the needed year.
With all of these unconstitutional
fiscal practices of COM St-Martin, considered abusive if compared to
the national taxation regime, it is useless to seize the Court
because you are systematically dismissed on the grounds of the COM
fiscal autonomy.
PARABLE
For
those of you that may find my plea long and boring, I beg you to
just simply see through the following parable, the present condition
of St-Martin generated from the change of status of St-Martin from a
Commune of Guadeloupe to an Overseas Collectivity of France
Writing
to enlighten my patriots on the true political realities affecting
the substantial growth of our island in particular in the midst of
an electoral campaign, may reveals to be but cherished illusions.
Yet when ever I sit before my computer to address a common
cause it is always my belief that I'm simply assuming the purpose
God has assigned to me, “share
with others the light I have blessed you with”
In
this perspective, it comes to my mind, that Jesus Christ during his
journey here on earth addressed his disciples and the the people in
parables as to be assured of their clear understanding of his
interpretation of God's word.
So likewise I have decided to
invent a little parable, hoping it may help to translate in a
grass-root language my analysis of the conditions leading COM
St-Martin transfer of competences budget to a perpetual yearly debt
burden in favor of France.
There was a native family living
on a little house lot of land bound with a very large estate
belonging to a very wealthy family of european origin.
In the
bound separating the two properties was a huge breadfruit tree.
Rooted on the european family side, many branches were fallen over
on the native family property and the latter considered themselves
the natural owners of all the fruits harvest on their side.
They
enjoyed peacefully for many decades this situation, the fruits
harvested played a substantial role in their livelihood.
Then
comes a cyclone, the heavy winds of which uprooted partly this
breadfruit tree, laying the trunk and all the branches on the
property of the native family, leaving only the roots on the
european family property.
The native family desperate to
preserve there acquired status as now becoming the natural owners of
all the branches of the tree and therefore the fruits produced,
pleaded before the European family, not to trunk off the tree from
laying over the fence and that they are willing to accept any deal
proposed to them that will guaranty the preservation of their new
status.
In answer to their request, the European family
proposed to them two conditions, first the payment of a yearly soil
sustenance fee for the root of the tree and secondly as to ease the
burden off the parent tree, they must ground layer (marcotter) the
branches of the tree by fastening them down as to berry them in the
soil so that they may produce roots and become less dependent on the
parent tree.
The native family accepted the deal and did as
proposed to them and expected to flourish more than ever before.
Unfortunately their dreams were but short lived, the layered
branches never grow roots and at the same time the tree withered
and was becoming lesser and lesser fruitful.
The reason of
their deception can be accused to the following causes:
The
layering method by branches proposed by the European family is
practically ineffective applied to breadfruit trees, known more
commonly to multiply essentially from its roots
The European
family being experts in the layering of plants, exploited
excessively the roots of the breadfruit tree as to obtain plants for
their personal orchard and for sale on the market.
This
excessive exploitation weakened the capacity of the parent tree to
nourish all its branches and root shoots and yet to remain fruitful.
Such was the source of the native family deception, but they did not
had the necessary expertise to discover and analyze the source of
the deceit they have been victims of.
Before the advent of
the cyclone, we had a breadfruit tree standing up straight by its
trunk. There was no ambiguity in regards to the natural owners of
its produced fruits. There was no charges for soil sustenance.
After the cyclone, we find a breadfruit tree lying to the
ground, trunk and branches lying on one side of the barrier and
roots on the other side.
Before the cyclone there was no
questions regarding the distribution of the fruits produced by the
breadfruit tree, the sharing of the fruits was latent, free of cost
and obeyed only to the sole providence of nature
After the
cyclone,
The European family slyly, reduced the branches of the breadfruit tree to a withering state, yet has induced the native family to the belief that they have it in full management of its produce and full control over its propagation by its branches.
Yet, we find the native family dazzled by the thought of owning
the entire breadfruit tree and to be able to dispose of all of its
fruits and on the other side, the European family with expertise
financial insights on how to exploit to the fullest all the factors
of the new equation created by the fallen of its ultra-peripheral
breadfruit tree.
