Can Saint Lucia transition from being a developing small state to a developed small state like Taiwan, Singapore and other small sized developed countries?
The answer is yes, it can. But for that to happen two core changes must take place: The mentality of Saint Lucians must evolve toward being goal-oriented, embracing a strong work ethic, and political parties, whether in government or opposition, must understand that good governance goes beyond the power of the ruling party and must entail a meaningful partnership between the opposition and ruling parties.
Past and present events have too often shown the ruling party and the opposition at loggerheads over projects that have all what it takes to push Saint Lucia further onward on the road to full development.
Saint Lucia needs a constructive partnership between ruling and opposition parties. Rather than constant criticism for criticism’s sake , opposition parties should recognise their role in ensuring good governance. The success of Saint Lucia’s democracy depends on effective collaboration, where opposition leaders play a meaningful role equivalent to cabinet ministers. But they can only do this beneficially if governments recognize the fundamental fact that they do not reflect the opinions of all of the population (indeed, usually only just over 50%).
The sad reality of opposition parties in this country is the belief that they exist simply to criticise the ruling parties even in the face of projects like DSH and Global Ports Holding (GPH); projects that if properly designed are wins for Saint Lucia.
The Saint Lucia Labour Party in opposition hammered the DSH project under the ruling United Workers Party, saying the deal was hatched in secrecy.
Today the United Workers Party is the opposition, hammering the GPH project signed by the ruling Labour Party, using almost the same words as the Labour Party did while in opposition.
How can Saint Lucia move forward in an environment like this when the opposition always believe the ruling party has it wrong. Or is it that the Government of the day deliberately keep the opposition in the dark spawning speculation and mistrust between what are, essentially, partners in the governance of our Country.
Let’s look at one of today’s controversies, the agreement between the Government of Saint Lucia and Global Ports Holding which has officially initiated cruise operations and the management of related services at Port Castries.
Tourism Minister Dr. Ernest Hilaire has emphasized that the modernisation of cruise port facilities in Castries and Soufriere aligns with the government’s goal of ensuring more Saint Lucians benefit from the thriving tourism industry – an unarguably beneficial sentiment.
Prime Minister Philip J. Pierre echoed these sentiments, urging the developers to design the new cruise port facilities for mutually beneficial economic returns. The issue between the opposition and the Government is the disclosure of the terms on which GPH have been engaged as partners. The Prime Minister seeks to reassure Saint Lucians that Port Castries and Soufriere remain national assets, not sold to external entities, and still belong to the people of Saint Lucia. What he fails to disclose are the terms under which the developer has been invited to operate our Ports.
Mehmet Kutman, Chairman of Global Ports Holding, concurs with the Prime Minister’s stance, emphasizing that GPH serves as a development partner in the modernization efforts for the cruise port facilities in Castries and Soufriere, and Medford Francis, Deputy Managing Director of Bank of Saint Lucia (which is financing the project), expresses keen support for a development that will directly impact the local economy.
Opposition Leader Allen Chastanet, however, remains skeptical about the project. He has raised questions about Global Ports Holding’s financial dealings with local organizations and contends that hiring GPH was unnecessary, as the government had sufficient funds to undertake the project independently.
In an April 30, 2024 letter addressed to Lancelot Arnold, General Manager of Global Ports Holding (Saint Lucia) Ltd., Chastanet explains why the recognised opposition did not endorse the agreement between the government and GPH.
As pointed out by Chastanet, Global Ports Holding was granted a concession for 30 years with a likely additional 10-year extension, a decision made without competitive bidding. The deal is expected to generate over EC$1 billion in potential revenue, which will be shared between the Government of Saint Lucia and Global Ports Holding. Chastanet has raised a question that resonates with many: Why hasn’t the government disclosed the details of its contract with Global Ports Holding? The public is left to wonder if they will have to wait for a leak, similar to the DSH agreement from July 2016, to learn the contents of this agreement.
Chastanet believes that the agreement with Global Ports Holding is disproportionately favourable to the company and could adversely affect the existing agreements with local stakeholders, including vendors, taxi operators, shopkeepers, tour operators, and others.
The call for transparency and accountability in governance has been a consistent one, emphasizing that these are critical pillars of a democratic society. Yet, it seems that these principles are always being trumpeted by opposition parties and overlooked when those same parties assume the reins of government, which is almost inevitable in a democracy.
The situation mirrors the DSH agreement, where there were calls for public disclosure of the contract details. Now, the same demands are being made regarding the Global Ports Holding contract.
Saint Lucia stands on the cusp of moving from a developing to a developed nation, with sustainable development, cooperative efforts, and the successful tackling of unique challenges being key to this transition. It is imperative that a united dedication to advancement, transcending political lines, play a significant role in the nation’s progress.