In recent days, several claims have been made regarding the May 7 Island Council meeting, including the claim that I interrupted Mr. Van Putten during his discourse on the roaming animal agenda point.
Let the record show: that claim is simply not supported by the public recording.
The meeting was streamed. The recording is available. The public can see and hear for themselves what took place.
We no longer live in the dark days where statements can be made and narratives can be shaped without being tested against the record. Today, what is said can be checked against what was recorded, documented, and publicly available. Whether it comes from me, Mr. Van Putten, or anyone else in public life, what is said must be able to stand up to scrutiny.
I will not participate in rewriting history when the public record is available.
The roaming animal matter did not appear out of nowhere. Last year, I presented the roaming animal project to the Island Council in a closed-door session, in the presence of the roaming animal team and Island Council members. The project was discussed, the consequences and responsibilities were made clear, and the direction was agreed upon.
Now that implementation has begun, it is unacceptable to act as though this matter was never brought before the Council or as though government is acting without basis. I will not accept being politically penalized for implementing a project that was presented to and agreed upon by the same Island Council.
If there are questions, ask them. If there are concerns, raise them. That is the role of the Island Council. But let us be honest about the record and the process that brought us here.
What concerns me is not scrutiny. Scrutiny is part of democracy. What concerns me is the continued pattern of turning serious discussions into personal attacks, accusations, and political distraction.
Let me also be clear: any attempt to use a minor exchange earlier in the meeting as justification for what followed is unacceptable.
Even if there is disagreement, even if there is an interruption, that does not give anyone the right to lose decorum, call names, drag persons into the discussion who are not present to defend themselves, attack civil servants, or move far away from the agenda point being discussed.
No one should use victimhood as a shield for conduct that falls below the standard expected on the floor of the Island Council.
This is not an isolated concern. Over the years, we have seen disrespectful conduct and inappropriate language used on the floor of the Island Council. We do not need to repeat every word or recount every incident. The people of Statia know what they have seen and heard.
What is even more concerning is the impact this has on civil servants. Civil servants should be able to attend Island Council and Central Committee meetings to provide information and support government processes without fear of being attacked, humiliated, or intimidated.
When public servants feel uncomfortable appearing before the Council because they fear being personally targeted, that is a serious problem.
The Island Council floor must not be used as a platform to intimidate civil servants. It is not meant to be used as the “bully pulpit,” as Mr. Van Putten himself often refers to it. It is one of the highest democratic institutions on this island, and it should be treated as such.
That is not accountability.
Respecting the people means respecting the institutions that serve them. It means debating the issues, asking the hard questions, and holding government accountable, but doing so with facts, discipline, and respect.
During the meeting, repeated allegations and insinuations of corruption were also made against this government. Let me be clear: if anyone truly believes corruption or wrongdoing exists within this government, then Article 160 of the WolBES exists for exactly that purpose.
Invoke it.
Allow the proper authorities to investigate. Allow the facts to come to light. And allow the truth to speak for itself.
Serious allegations require serious action. You cannot continue making accusations publicly while refusing to use the legal mechanisms available to address them. Accountability must be based on facts, evidence, and due process, not public spectacle, personal opinions, assumptions, or emotions presented as fact for political gain.
The question we should be asking ourselves is simple: what is the problem with trying to work in unity?
Since becoming Party Leader in 2020, I have been consistent in the direction I believe Statia needs: unity, transparency, accountability, and putting Statia above politics. Country above self. Working together in the best interest of St. Eustatius.
That direction has not changed.
Whether I served from the Island Council or now from the Executive Council, my values have remained the same. I believe in building a stronger Statia together, for Statia, and with Statia.
But it appears that this direction is being resisted by those who are more comfortable with the old politics of division, hostility, intimidation, and personal attacks.
For decades, this island has experienced political division, conflict, and separation. And we must honestly ask ourselves: where has that truly brought us?
The greatest progress Statia has experienced came during moments when people chose cooperation over division, dialogue over hostility, and unity over personal conflict. Through collaboration and working together, we were able to move beyond difficult periods, tackle longstanding challenges, strengthen governance, and move important developments forward.
Leadership is not about who shouts the loudest, insults the hardest, or creates the most chaos. Leadership is about building bridges and keeping people focused on a shared purpose, even during disagreement.
Unity requires maturity, dialogue, compromise, and leadership willing to place the island above personal conflict.
The people of Statia are crying out for unity, stability, and leadership focused on solutions instead of conflict. This island is too small, and the challenges too important, for us to continue allowing division to consume our politics.
My focus remains on governing responsibly, protecting the integrity of our institutions, and continuing the work necessary to move Statia forward.
Statia deserves serious leadership, factual debate, and a Council focused on solutions — not confusion, blame-shifting, intimidation, or personal attacks.
Rechelline Leerdam
Commissioner & Party Leader, PLP
