A recent article appearing under the name of James Stanislaus came to my attention. It is one of these articles which repeat a number of United Workers Party talking points, and which one might be tempted to dismiss observing that it is the same diatribe that has been trotted out ad infinitum, and has been debunked as many times by verifiable fact. However, the psuedo-scholarly approach which the article takes, especially with respect to the use of language and false argumentation is sufficiently dangerous that it demands response to its falsehoods and sophistry. One should hasten to add that all his articles about the current government are of that ilk, as they emanate from his jaundiced perspective of life in St. Lucia
That particular article, titled somewhat longwindedly, “The Mark of Leadership: What Philip J. Pierre’s Tolerance Is Costing St. Lucia”, is a calculated exercise in disinformation. It is a brazen flying in the face of fact, that attempts to benefit from the proverbial observation, that if you inundate the electorate with enough mud, some will stick. It is precisely because of this we must continue to expose this for what it really is: garbage from the deepest cesspit that must not be allowed to ferment, fester and infect our body politic.
The supposed Mr. Stanislaus deals with what he characterises as the “behaviour of an organisation”, in this context the Saint Lucia Labour Party, which he describes as unchecked misconduct which has apparently led to a certain fracturing of Saint Lucian society in all spheres. And he goes on to delineate what he proffers as the prime examples of such behaviour. Let us put these allegations of the United Workers Party under the microscope.
Predictably, he begins with the Labour Party’s relationship with Richard Frederick. It is of no small note that all of the present flambeau top brass stoutly defended Mr. Frederick against what were then, and still remain, unverified allegations. In fact, the loudest mouth-piece of the UWP, Mr. Guy Joseph, was one of Frederick’s most consistent defenders. The incident in Gros Islet when Richard Frederick was a minister of Sir John Compton’s Cabinet, and when Guy Joseph stood very visibly next to RF as a virtual bodyguard (a bit diminutive of course) comes quite graphically to mind. All of this was before Richard Frederick (RF) broke ranks with Chastanet’s UWP.
There is the continued harping on RF’s US visa status. The writer of the article under scrutiny seems to be of the view that one of the qualifications for holding a cabinet position in Saint Lucia, a sovereign country, is having a US visa. It is no surprise that the surrogates of the Chastanet-Guy Joseph Party should take such a position. Their leader, Mr. Chastanet, clearly believes that we should be beholden to those with whom we have had a colonial or neo-colonial relationship — didn’t colonialism have a conscience; and did we not jump to the Lima Group’s tune, abandoning a valued diplomatic relationship?
Those who sit in the Cabinet of a sovereign Saint Lucia do so at the behest and according to the considered judgement of the Prime Minister — not of some foreign power. And the PM’s judgement has proven to be perceptive and effective. The same cannot be said of the leader of the opposition when in government. Or he would not be at pains to explain the PAJOAH letters.
Again, the next “whipping boy” or proverbial “Good Friday Boboli”, is Dr. Ernest Hilaire, and the CIP. Stanislaus James’ “scandals” are based soley on spurious allegations by a convicted fraudster, from whom Allen Chastanet was to have received “proof” many moons ago. A trip to the United States in quest of the promised proof left Chastanet and Guy empty-handed, and Martinez, the source of this “proof”, backtracking. after a momentous journey to the United States.
After the vitriolic attacks on Richard Frederick and Ernest Hilaire, the writer went on to make the customary assertions – the vague allegations of the dubious handling of government assets etc. — statements which appear to be a more accurate characterisation of the Chastanet regime than of any other administration.
Mr. Stanislaus’s ludicrous statements about “dubious handling of public assets” and “underselling of government lands” are not borne out by his narrative. His “scandals” appear to exist only in the warped minds of those who would use contrived issues to mask the truly egregious actions of the Chastanet regime. The leasing of 1000 acres of land to a Malaysian businessman at US$1 an acre for a lifetime of 99 years, the more recent discovery of the actual sale of other Vieux Fort lands to that same businessman at a peppercorn price, the disposing of the Daher Mall at a value five times lower than market value, the handing over of EC$7.3 million in contravention of the Finance Act, to a cement dealer to procure vaccines that Saint Lucia is yet to receive. The PAJOAH Letters with respect to questionable financial transactions under which a certain minister said he “saw” his signature, have already been alluded to.
The questionable handling of the affairs of government and general governance by the UWP appears to be a mirror image of the opaque and suspect handling of inner-party governance . It is to be noted, that consistent with the requirement that the party leader should not be subject to internal scrutiny by the lesser mortals in the party, are the reports that an investigation commissioned by the party into why the 2021 elections were lost, has never seen the light of day. The narrative is that those who sit astride the party – particularly the leader and his deputy – have held this report close to the chest. If the findings of this report were ventilated, their leadership would be seriously called into question, and it is quite possible that they would be unceremoniously booted out. It is this that has fueled the speculation that key persons in the party hierarchy, including one who has been very close to the Chastanet family, have withdrawn their support, and are preparing in the backrooms of realpolitik for the aftermath of the 2026 elections.