By a Concerned UWP Supporter
There comes a time when even the quiet and meek must find their voice. UWP supporters, that time is now!
UWP internal divisions are becoming a serious political liability. Our party cannot allow itself to become controlled by outsiders and wannabe rainmakers. Loyalty to principle is being replaced by personal ambition, political courage is giving way to convenience and, in some cases, downright stupidity.
Our party cannot allow itself to become controlled by outsiders and wannabe rainmakers. Loyalty to principle is being replaced by personal ambition, political courage is giving way to convenience and, in some cases, downright stupidity.
Some characters, desperate for control within the party, refuse to become part of the process but are quite prepared to throw blows from the outside. And while they are busy attacking their own party, they are strengthening the very political opponent we seem to have forgotten: the Saint Lucia Labour Party.
Some who failed to secure positions for themselves or their preferred candidates have allowed personal disappointment to take precedence over the interests of the party. Others privately complain about crime, the economy and the direction of the country, yet publicly reserve their fiercest attacks for the UWP.
What exactly is the objective here?
If you want to lead the party, get involved. Organize. Convince the membership. Challenge for leadership through the democratic process.
But do not stand outside throwing stones while others are doing the difficult work of keeping the party together.
Political Parties Are Not Playgrounds for Wounded Egos
Political parties are not social clubs. They are not private playgrounds for ambitious personalities, nor are they vehicles for the gratification of wounded egos.
They exist to advance policies, defend principles, hold governments accountable and offer the electorate a credible alternative.
A party without discipline can go nowhere.
The UWP must examine the reasons for its electoral defeats, but it must also understand the political machinery it is confronting. Questions surrounding campaign financing, the Citizenship by Investment Programme (CIP) and the advantages enjoyed by an incumbent government deserve serious scrutiny.
What the party cannot afford is to spend its limited energy fighting itself while Labour concentrates on retaining power.
The SLP has never been shy about attacking UWP leaders. Sir John Compton, Vaughan Lewis and Stephenson King all faced political ridicule and personal attacks.
Who can forget the attacks on King’s educational qualifications or the references to him as “Stephenson Queen”?
The attacks on Allen Chastanet are therefore nothing new.
What is troubling is the willingness of some UWP supporters to stand aside, or worse, contribute to the attacks on their own political leadership.
And if this continues, whoever leads the party next may discover that the same fate awaits them.
If You Cannot Defend Allen Chastanet, Who Can You Defend?
Let us address the elephant in the room.
Allen Chastanet is not some political novice who wandered into the UWP yesterday. He led the party to victory in 2016, served as prime minister and retained his Micoud South seat in the 2025 general election with 58.6% of the vote, according to the Saint Lucia Electoral Department.
His record in tourism, economic management, international engagement and the handling of the COVID-19 pandemic deserves recognition and serious examination.
His supporters point to the country’s tourism recovery, its international standing and the difficult decisions taken during the pandemic as evidence of his leadership.
Official figures published by the Saint Lucia Central Statistical Office show that stay-over visitor arrivals increased from 199,347 in 2021 to 356,237 in 2022, demonstrating the strength of the country’s recovery following the pandemic’s devastating impact on international travel.
The Saint Lucia Tourism Authority also highlighted the island’s strong recovery performance in early 2022.
These developments form part of the wider debate about Saint Lucia’s tourism policies, economic resilience and the leadership decisions taken during an unprecedented global crisis.
He is also regarded by many supporters as a man who embodies family values, an attribute they consider important in public leadership.
Does that make him perfect? Of course not!
But here is what I want those constantly attacking him to explain.
If you cannot defend Allen Chastanet with his record in tourism, the economy, international recognition and the handling of COVID-19, who the bloody hell will you ever defend?
If a former prime minister with that experience and political record is not good enough, then who exactly is?
Where are these supposedly superior leaders? Where is their vision? Their record? Their international standing? Their ability to take on the Labour Party?
For heaven’s sake, if you cannot defend the achievements of your own leader where those achievements deserve defending, how do you expect the electorate to take you seriously?
Nobody is suggesting that Chastanet should be beyond criticism. But there is a difference between constructive criticism and an obsession with tearing down the very person carrying much of the party’s political burden.
Want to Replace Chastanet? Then Do the Work!
Nobody has a divine right to lead the UWP, including Allen Chastanet.
But neither does anyone have a divine right to inherit its leadership simply because they are dissatisfied with him.
If you believe you can do better, present yourself to the membership. Get involved at the constituency level. Convince the delegates that you have the vision, competence and commitment to take the party forward.
That is how political leadership should be contested.
The party’s democratic processes must be open, transparent and fair. Those processes should be respected, and anyone who believes they are being denied a fair opportunity should be prepared to raise legitimate concerns.
But political leadership is not awarded simply because someone believes it is their turn.
Chastanet has demonstrated a willingness to make difficult political decisions, including decisions that have angered individuals within his own party.
His supporters regard that willingness as a strength.
Those who disagree are entitled to challenge his judgment. But disagreement must be accompanied by something more substantial than personal resentment.
What exactly are the alternatives being offered?
What policies would be different? What organizational reforms would be introduced? What strategy would return the UWP to government?
Wanting Chastanet out is not, by itself, a political programme.
How Labour Benefits From UWP Internal Divisions
This is the part that should concern every serious UWP supporter.
Saint Lucia faces serious challenges involving crime, healthcare, education, economic opportunity, governance and public confidence in national institutions.
There are questions about the management of public resources, the CIP and the direction in which the country is heading. The debate surrounding the programme remains relevant, particularly following Investment Minister Ernest Hilaire’s position that Saint Lucia will not shut down its Citizenship by Investment Programme.
These are matters that demand a strong and organized opposition.
Yet instead of concentrating their energies on scrutinizing the government, some people appear determined to make internal leadership battles the party’s principal occupation.
What sense does that make?
The Labour administration should be required to explain its decisions, defend its policies and account for its stewardship of public resources.
Instead, it enjoys the political advantage of confronting an opposition distracted by its own divisions.
And let us not pretend that this has no consequences.
When the opposition is weakened, the government faces less coordinated political scrutiny. When party supporters spend their time attacking one another, the governing party has less work to do.
Labour does not have to defeat a united UWP if the UWP is determined to defeat itself.
Chastanet has carried an enormous share of the responsibility for representing the UWP in Parliament and keeping its political arguments before the public.
But no serious political organization can expect one individual to do everything.
Where are the other voices? Where are the people prepared to defend the party’s record, challenge government decisions and articulate an alternative vision for Saint Lucia?
Leadership is not merely about occupying a position. It is about doing the work.
And that responsibility does not belong to Chastanet alone. It belongs to the wider organization, its officers, constituency branches, members and supporters.
Let me be absolutely clear.
Internal disagreement is not betrayal. Criticism is not disloyalty. A healthy political party must allow both.
But there is a fundamental difference between principled disagreement and calculated obstruction.
There is a difference between challenging a leader’s decisions and undermining the party’s ability to function.
And there is certainly a difference between offering a credible alternative and simply creating confusion because personal ambitions have not been satisfied.
The UWP must have room for serious debate, leadership competition and honest examination of its shortcomings.
It must also learn from its electoral defeats and demonstrate that it understands the concerns of voters who have turned away from it.
But that work cannot be accomplished through endless internal warfare.
UWP Supporters, Open Your Eyes!
We are all tired of being in opposition. Nobody wants to keep losing elections.
But frustration is not a strategy, and personal ambition is not a substitute for leadership.
The UWP must decide whether it wants to remain consumed by personalities or concentrate on its responsibility to the people of Saint Lucia.
Those who wish to challenge Chastanet should do so openly and legitimately. Those who support him should defend his record with conviction and evidence.
And everyone who claims to believe in the party should remember that the political objective is not to destroy one another.
It is to build an organization capable of holding Labour accountable and earning the confidence of the electorate.
So, to those who spend more time attacking their own party than challenging the government, I have one question:
If you cannot put aside your personal grievances long enough to fight the real political battle, what exactly are you fighting for?
Because while the UWP fights itself, Labour governs.
And if the party cannot get its own house in order, it has no business asking Saint Lucians to trust it with theirs.
