The United Workers Party has carefully reviewed the Prime Minister’s national address of January 11, 2026, and the accompanying fact sheet concerning the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Government of Saint Lucia and the Government of the United States.
The UWP notes the Government’s repeated assurance that the MOU is non-binding, creates no legal obligation, and does not, of itself, require Saint Lucia to accept any third-country nationals or deportees. However, it is precisely for that reason that the process surrounding this agreement requires clarification, according to the UWP.
“If the MOU requires no action, authorizes no transfers, and imposes no obligations, why did it require Cabinet approval and a national address by the Prime Minister and of what value is it to the government and people of St. Lucia?” the UWP said in a press release this week.
In the interest of transparency, democratic accountability, and public trust, the UWP poses the following questions:
1. When did discussions with the United States on this MOU first begin and when did it end? Was the Cabinet briefed on the matter prior to the election, and if so, why was the public not informed?
2. How does the Government define “third-country nationals” within the context of this arrangement, and does it accept that such individuals may have no legal, social, or historical ties to Saint Lucia?
3. According to the Prime Minister, the MOU is a negotiated Framework. What benefits or concessions is Saint Lucia expected to receive under the MOU by St. Lucia?
4. What security and background screening standards would apply to any individual proposed under this framework, and will Saint Lucian security agencies have full access to intelligence and criminal records?
5. Are deportees with serious criminal records, violent offences, or known gang affiliations excluded from the program?
6. What are the projected financial and social costs to Saint Lucia, and does the State have the (institutional) capacity to absorb them, should the Government give effect to this MOU?
7. Which ministry or agency will be responsible for coordination, housing, healthcare, social support, monitoring, and implementation, and at whose expense will these obligations be funded?
8. What is the duration of this MOU, and what exit provisions exist, and under what circumstances would Saint Lucia withdraw should the arrangement prove contrary to the national interest?
The United Workers Party reiterates its support for strengthening diplomatic cooperation with key international partners. However, the UWP’s concerns lie with “the absence of timely disclosure and democratic consent for such arrangements, as well as the lack of adequate information on the benefits that will accrue to Saint Lucia.”
Moreover, the UWP says it is troubled by the limited details provided by the government regarding the costs of hosting these third-country nationals, the potential security risks associated with the programme, and the legal status that will be conferred on these non-national deportees.
The UWP is firmly of the view that transparency is not an inconvenience to governance; it is its foundation.
“The people of Saint Lucia therefore deserve inclusion in the consultative process when such decisions are being contemplated not after decisions are announced,” the UWP emphasized.