Choose Change Wisely
Be Careful what you wish for Grenada and the wider Caribbean!
Introduction
The saying "Be careful what you wish for" is an age-old warning that has been echoed through the centuries. Philosophers and religious leaders from ancient times often cautioned people about the dangers of having their desires fulfilled, emphasizing the importance of distinguishing between wants and needs.
In June 2022, the people of Grenada voted for change, expressing their desires through the ballot box. The election ended with a 9 to 6 victory, ushering in change, but was this outcome truly what the country needed at such a critical time?
When seeking change, it is important to define the parameters of the change we seek. Change can be beneficial or destructive, depending on the clarity of vision and the wisdom behind the choices made. Therefore one must always choose change wisely. Fundamental questions need to be asked, like, "What kind of change are we seeking? Is it driven by a genuine need for progress, or is it a reaction to temporary dissatisfaction?"
Change is frequently paired with hope for better leadership that will bring prosperity, stability, and solutions to longstanding issues. However, history has shown ill-considered changes often lead to unforeseen consequences. Grenada’s political landscape is no stranger to such dynamics. The enthusiasm of the electorate, while commendable, must be tempered with a sober assessment of what lies ahead.
A Brief History of Change in Governments in Grenada
Grenada's political history is marked by a series of significant shifts in political leadership, each driven by different factors and leading to various outcomes. From colonial rule to independence, from revolutionary upheaval to democratic governance, Grenada's journey has been complex and transformative.
Colonial Era and the Path to Independence
Grenada, like many Caribbean islands, was a British colony for much of its modern history. The push for change began in the mid-20th century as anti-colonial sentiments grew across the region. The rise of nationalist movements led by figures like Eric Gairy, who founded the Grenada United Labour Party (GULP) in 1950, played a crucial role in advocating for workers' rights and political autonomy. Gairy's leadership culminated in Grenada achieving associated statehood in 1967, and ultimately full independence from Britain on February 7, 1974.
The transition to independence under Gairy's government brought initial hope, but it also led to increased authoritarianism. Gairy's regime was marked by allegations of corruption, political repression, and the use of his notorious paramilitary force, the "Mongoose Gang," to intimidate opponents.
The Grenada Revolution (1979-1983)
Dissatisfaction with Gairy's rule grew, particularly among the younger generation and intellectuals. On March 13, 1979, the New Jewel Movement (NJM), led by Maurice Bishop, seized power (unconstitutional change, support by the majority of the people) in a what was called a bloodless coup while Gairy was out of the country. The NJM established the People's Revolutionary Government (PRG), marking a radical shift toward socialism.
The revolution was fueled by widespread discontent with Gairy's authoritarianism and the desire for a government that would address social and economic inequalities. Bishop's government sought to implement policies that emphasized education, healthcare, and infrastructure development, while aligning Grenada with socialist and non-aligned movements globally.
Initially, the PRG made strides in social and economic development, but internal divisions and external pressures, particularly from the United States, led to instability. The government's authoritarian tendencies became more pronounced. A faction began to emerge leading to Bishop's house arrest and eventual execution in 1983 by hardliners within the NJM, an event that plunged the country into chaos.
The U.S. Invasion and the Return to Democratic Governance
The power struggle within the PRG and the execution of Bishop alarmed the international community, particularly the United States, which feared the establishment of a communist stronghold in the Caribbean. On October 25, 1983, the U.S. led an invasion of Grenada, codenamed Operation Urgent Fury, which resulted in the overthrow of the PRG and the restoration of what was termed a democratic government.
The invasion was followed by the appointment of an interim government and the holding of elections in 1984, which returned Grenada to democratic rule. The New National Party (NNP), led by Herbert Blaize, won the election, marking the beginning of a new era of political stability. Since then, Grenada has maintained a democratic political system, though it has experienced fluctuations in political leadership, particularly between the NNP and the National Democratic Congress (NDC).
Recent Political Changes and Economic Challenges
Grenada’s recent political history has been marked by a series of significant challenges that have shaped the country’s economic landscape and influenced changes in government. The devastating impacts of Hurricane Ivan in 2004 and Hurricane Emily in 2005, followed by the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) in 2007–2008, played crucial roles in shaping the political dynamics that led to a shift in power from the New National Party (NNP) to the National Democratic Congress (NDC) in 2008.
The Impact of Hurricanes Ivan and Emily
Hurricane Ivan, which struck Grenada in September 2004, was one of the most powerful storms to hit the island in recorded history. With winds reaching up to 125 mph, Ivan caused catastrophic damage, destroying over 90% of the housing stock, crippling the agricultural sector, and severely impacting infrastructure. The island’s primary export, nutmeg, suffered a massive blow, with an estimated 70% of the trees being destroyed. The total damage was estimated at over $900 million usd, more than twice the country’s GDP at the time.
Just ten months later, in July 2005, Hurricane Emily hit Grenada, compounding the devastation caused by Ivan. Although Emily was less powerful, it further damaged the already weakened infrastructure and slowed down recovery efforts. The back-to-back hurricanes left Grenada in a state of prolonged economic distress, with the government urgently needing to mobilize resources for reconstruction and recovery.
The NNP government, led by Prime Minister Keith Mitchell, faced significant criticism for its handling of the recovery process. While efforts were made to rebuild, the scale of the disaster hindered the government’s capacity to respond effectively. The economic hardship and moderate recovery led to growing public dissatisfaction, setting the stage for political change.
The Global Financial Crisis (2007–2008)
As Grenada was still grappling with the aftermath of the hurricanes, the global economy was hit by the Global Financial Crisis in 2007–2008. The GFC triggered a worldwide economic downturn, leading to reduced foreign investment, a decline in tourism, and lower remittances — all critical components of Grenada’s economy. The combination of domestic challenges and external economic shocks created a perfect storm of economic hardship.
The GFC exacerbated Grenada’s fiscal difficulties, as government revenues declined and debt levels soared. The NNP government’s economic policies, which had previously focused on infrastructure development and attracting foreign investment, were no longer sustainable in the face of the global downturn. Public debt reached unsustainable levels, and austerity measures were implemented, further straining the population.
The mounting economic challenges and public discontent culminated in the 2008 general election, where the NDC, led by Tillman Thomas, won a decisive victory over the NNP. The election reflected the electorate’s desire for a change in leadership and a new approach to governance. The NDC campaigned on promises of transparency, accountability, and economic recovery, appealing to a population weary of the ongoing economic struggles.
Outcomes of the 2008 Political Change
The transition from the NNP to the NDC in 2008 marked a significant shift in Grenada’s political landscape. The new government faced the daunting task of addressing the economic crisis while meeting the expectations of a population that had voted for change. The NDC government pursued a more cautious approach to economic management, focusing on fiscal consolidation, social programs, and rebuilding trust in public institutions.
However, the economic challenges inherited from the previous government, coupled with the lingering effects of the hurricanes and the GFC, limited the new administration’s ability to deliver rapid improvements. The global economic environment remained difficult, and while some progress was made, the recovery was slow and uneven.
The 2008 political change underscored the vulnerability of Grenada’s economy to external shocks and the importance of strong and resilient governance. While the NDC’s tenure was marked by efforts to stabilize the economy, it proved too much for them to handle. The NNP’s return to power in 2013 reflected ongoing concerns about economic mismanagement and diminishing economic growth and development. The period highlighted the need for strategic long-term planning to build a more resilient economy capable of withstanding both natural disasters and global economic fluctuations.
The Road to the 2022 Election
The years leading up to the 2022 general election in Grenada were marked by profound challenges, most notably the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. The pandemic exacerbated existing economic vulnerabilities and placed immense pressure on the ruling New National Party (NNP) government, led by Prime Minister Keith Mitchell. The NNP, which had enjoyed a long tenure in power, faced increasing criticism for its handling of the crisis and the broader economic fallout that ensued.
The Impact of COVID-19 on the Ruling Party and the Economy
The COVID-19 pandemic had a severe impact on Grenada’s economy, which is heavily dependent on tourism, agriculture, and remittances. Lockdowns, travel restrictions, and the global economic slowdown resulted in a sharp decline in tourism revenues, leading to widespread job losses and economic hardship. The agricultural sector also suffered due to disruptions in supply chains and reduced export demand.
The NNP government implemented various measures to mitigate the economic damage, including stimulus packages, social safety nets, and public health interventions. However, these efforts were criticized for being insufficient and poorly managed, even though according to the World Bank (WB), “Grenada has outperformed its eastern Caribbean peers in economic performance, achieving an average annual growth of 3.3 percent between 2015 and 2019, while keeping public debt relatively low and reducing poverty. Growth has been driven by construction and tourism, supported by structural reforms initiated in 2015.” The International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) input in it’s article “Grenada Sets Stage for Sustainable Growth” in May 2017, did little to alay fears.
The pandemic exacerbated the situation, revealing weaknesses in the country’s healthcare system and social infrastructure, fueling more public dissatisfaction. The economic contraction, combined with rising public debt and ongoing issues of governance, created a climate of discontent that resonated strongly with the electorate.
Proposed Transformation
In the lead-up to the 2022 election, the National Democratic Congress (NDC) under Dickon Mitchell presented a manifesto filled with promises aimed at transforming Grenada’s economy and governance. Some of the key pledges included boosting the agricultural sector through a National Spice Replanting Program, which aimed to revitalize the island’s nutmeg and spice industries. They also promised the establishment of a cannabis industry focused on medical and industrial uses, which would create jobs and generate foreign exchange. Additionally, the NDC vowed to create a cultural and creative economy, and to invest in the healthcare system by constructing a new public hospital in collaboration with St. George’s University and/or other Private Investors, along with implementing a National Health Insurance Scheme.
During the campaign, other promises heard were: regularizing temporary workers (Including the Imani program) and all public service contract workers as soon as or within 12 months of assuming office; increasing the amount paid to the most vulnerable; fixing the issue of the police pay and grade; paying pension that was mandated by law to be paid; implementing bi-monthly payments (not to be confused with fortnightly payments); Paying teachers salaries that were docked while they were on strike (A matter that was in court, with teachers subsequently losing the case); Grenlec bucket trucks to be loaned or rented to farmers after working hours to pick fruits they can’t reach; closing down and replacing Marketing and National Importing Board (MNIB) with a new Public Private Partnership within six months of dissolution; the distribution of the low income houses donated by the Chinese; within 12 months of forming the government, the starting of a nationwide housing program, called Project 500, to construct 500 Grenadian style houses in each parish each year; the development of the area called wall street expanding it and making it more convenient for patrons, expansion of the airport buildings with flyover, pedestrian flyovers in south St. George, etcetera.
Central to the NDC’s platform were promises of governance reforms — highlighting transparency, accountability, and institutional rebuilding. They aimed to empower Grenadians through policies that emphasized workers’ rights, environmental management, and foreign policy reform. The vision for transformation also included improving education, sports, and youth development, all while promoting unity and nation-building across political divides.
The 2008 and 2022 NDC Campaigns Comparison
The NDC’s 2022 campaign bore striking similarities to its platform in 2008 when the party, led by Tillman Thomas, also promised transparency, accountability, and economic recovery. In 2008, the NDC’s victory was seen as a rejection of the NNP’s economic policies, which had led to increasing public debt and fiscal challenges, especially in the aftermath of the devastating hurricanes and the Global Financial Crisis.
Once in power, the party’s (2008 NDC) tenure was marked by challenges, including difficulties in managing the economic fallout from the global financial crisis and internal party conflicts. The global economic environment remained challenging, and many of the promises made in 2008 were not fully realized, leading to disappointment among the electorate. Public dissatisfaction grew as the hoped-for recovery failed to materialize, and the NDC’s inability to deliver on its promises together with party infighting contributed to its defeat in the 2013 election, allowing the NNP to regain power.
A Historical Echo
As Grenada approached the 2022 general election, a palpable sense of déjà vu hung in the air. The political atmosphere was charged with the same desire for change that had characterized pivotal moments in the nation’s history, particularly in 1979. This earlier period was also marked by the rise of younger leaders and intellectuals who, disillusioned by the status quo, sought to reshape Grenada’s political and economic landscape. The parallels between the emergence of Maurice Bishop in 1979 and Dickon Mitchell in 2022, both of whom leapfrogged into leadership, are striking. With Bishop co-opting the grassroots JEWEL movement (JM) renaming it NJM to gain political advantage and the instant support of the movement’s following and Mitchell new to the public sector and politics, co-opting the then-struggling NDC party yearning for leadership for the same reasons. Underscoring how history, while it may not repeat, often rhymes.
The Emergence of Dickon Mitchell and the 2022 NDC
Grenada witnessed the rise of another young lawyer, Dickon Mitchell. Though not accompanied by the quality of intellectuals as was Bishop, nevertheless managed to led the National Democratic Congress (NDC) to victory. Like Bishop however, Dickon Mitchell capitalized on the desire for change among the younger generation and bourgeoisie, he however added the additional diaspora demographic , most of whom were disillusioned with the entrenched leadership of the New National Party (NNP) under Keith Mitchell. The NDC’s campaign echoed the promises made by the NJM decades earlier: transparency, accountability, and economic transformation. It resonated with a populace weary of the long-standing NNP rule and disillusioned by the government’s response to the pandemic.
The electorate’s demand for new leadership in 2022 was driven by similar frustrations as those in 1979 — a desire for better governance, equitable economic policies, and most importantly a break from the past. The NNP, which had dominated Grenadian politics for much of the 21st century, was perceived by many as being out of touch, with accusations of corruption, nepotism and a stagnant economic outlook fueling the call for change.
The Path of the 2022 NDC
As the 2022 NDC government took office, now under Dickon Mitchell, many hoped that this time would be different. The party’s platform, which emphasized economic transformation, youth empowerment, and good governance, resonated with a population eager for change. However, as the new government began to settle into power, signs of déjà vu began to emerge. Critics pointed to delays in implementing promised reforms, a lack of transparency in certain government dealings, a lackluster implementation of existing and proposed projects, rookie mistakes and a continuation of some of the same practices that had plagued previous administrations.
Just as the 2008 NDC government struggled to meet the expectations it had set, the 2022 NDC government with just over two years in office, has faced similar challenges. Economic recovery, which was a central promise, has been underwhelming. The ambitious plans for transformation seem to be falling on the wayside, leading to growing public skepticism. Concerns have been raised about whether the new administration is falling into the same patterns of governance that it once criticized — patterns that prioritize political survival over meaningful change.
Heading Down a Similar or Worse Path?
The parallels between the 2008 and 2022 NDC administrations suggest that Grenada may be witnessing a repeat of history, with a government that starts with high hopes and ends in disappointment. The risk is that the 2022 NDC, like its predecessor, could find itself overwhelmed by the challenges of governance and unable to fulfill its transformative promises. If this pattern continues, Grenada may once again find itself grappling with disillusionment and a desire for yet another change, perpetuating a cycle of unmet expectations.
Since taking office, the 2022 NDC government has made several policy decisions and proposed new laws that have raised concerns about the party’s commitment to its campaign promises of transparency, accountability, and economic transformation. Critics argue that the NDC is veering away from its stated goals, much like the 2008 administration.
For instance, the NDC government’s push for certain legislative changes has also been perceived as an attempt to centralize power and weaken checks and balances. The change from Fiscal Responsibility Act, №29 of 2015 (FRA) to Fiscal Resilience Act (FRA) with controversial changes ,such as, a significant clause that increases the threshold for sole procurement, which would reduce parliamentary oversight of government spending. This has been criticized for potentially enabling the executive branch to operate with less transparency and accountability. This change among others have raised concerns among civil society and the opposition party, who argue that such moves could pave the way for fiscal mismanagement and corruption.
Another example is the Data Protection Bill, while the government argues it is necessary for modernizing the economy and protecting personal data, critics argue that the bill does not provide adequate safeguards. The opposition has called for more public consultations and amendments to address these concerns. Despite this, the bill passed with minor amendments due to the government’s majority in parliament. One argument is that the bill’s broad and vaguely defined provisions could be used to silence critical voices (eg. whistleblowers) and stifle dissent, further entrenching the government’s power and reducing the space for democratic debate.
Also, the introduction by the government of the Nation Builders initiative, registered as a Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) and positioned as a platform for collaboration between the government, citizens, and private sector to tackle challenges such as inadequate water access and sanitation, particularly in rural areas. While Nation Builders appears to address real issues in underserved communities, there are concerns about potential pitfalls. The program is directed under the Ministry of Mobilization, Implementation, and Transformation, with a structure that could centralize significant power in the hands of government officials and felicitate the funneling of monies through the organization. Some critics argue that this could lead to inefficiencies or political manipulation, where the program may end up being more of a political tool than an effective mechanism for genuine development. There are worries that bypassing traditional government structures might undermine established procedures and checks, thus raising questions about transparency and long-term sustainability.
Additionally, the government’s approach to economic transformation has been questioned. While the NDC has promised to modernize the economy, its focus on Citizen by Investment (CBI) program-rebranded to Investment Migration Agency (IMA)-has raised concerns about the potential for increased economic dependency and the marginalization of local businesses. The push for rapid economic liberalization, without adequate safeguards for local industries, could lead to job losses and increased inequality, undermining the long-term sustainability of the economy.
Another issue relating to the CBI/IMA is the sizeable increase in citizens of 8512 over a 24 month period. These foreign individuals whom acquired citizenship through financial means rather than through long-term residency or cultural integration are eligible to vote provided they reside in Grenada for at least one year. Added to this issue, is the rise in registered voters of 3579 in 22 months together with the appointment of a New Supervisor of Elections (SOE) at the Parliamentary elections Office (POE) during a time of ongoing scheduled public consultations on the procurement and installation of a new computerized voter registration system. This raises several concerns regarding the integrity of the electoral process, the potential impact of the CBI/IMA program on voter demographics, the risk of electoral manipulation or inadvertent inaccuracies in voter rolls and questions about the thoroughness of voter vetting and registration practices. The combination of a rapidly expanding voter base, the influence of financially driven citizenship programs, the change in the administration of the electoral process and the potential change in the voter registration system, could lead to perceptions of electoral manipulation or bias, ultimately undermining public trust in democratic institutions.
Good Governance or Opportunism?
Good governance is a cornerstone of democratic societies, characterized by transparency, accountability, adherence to the rule of law, and the ethical management of public resources. It is intended to ensure that public institutions serve the interests of the populace without succumbing to corruption or the abuse of power. However, in the dynamic world of politics, the line between good governance and opportunism can sometimes blur, leaving citizens to question the true motivations behind their leaders’ actions.
Governments are ideally supposed to act in the best interest of their citizens, making decisions based on long-term benefits and ethical considerations. However, opportunism in politics refers to actions taken primarily to gain power or advantage whether monetary or otherwise, often disregarding ethical principles.
The 2022 NDC government in Grenada, under the leadership of Prime Minister Dickon Mitchell, came into power on a wave of optimism and promises of transparency, accountability, and economic transformation. However, recent actions and policies have raised concerns that the government may be exhibiting opportunistic tendencies, drifting away from the principles of good governance it once championed.
Questionable Appointments and Conflicts of Interest
One of the most contentious issues facing the current administration has been the appointment of key officials and advisors with close personal or political ties to the ruling party. Critics argue that these appointments may reflect a form of cronyism, undermining the merit-based system that is fundamental to good governance. For example, the appointment of several individuals with limited relevant experience to high-level positions within state-owned enterprises and regulatory bodies has sparked public outcry. The appointments have led to accusations that the government is more interested in consolidating power and rewarding loyalists than in promoting competent and transparent governance.
The concerns about conflicts of interest extend to the awarding of government contracts. Allegations have surfaced that contracts for major public projects are being awarded to firms (some recently formed) with connections to prominent NDC members, raising red flags about the integrity of the procurement process. These practices not only erode public trust but also hinder the development of a fair and competitive business environment, which is essential for long-term economic growth.
Other conflicts of interest are related to government officials business dealings, with various members of the administration being agents for the CBI/IMA program, from Ambassador to Minister of Finance to Prime Minister and others. Some government officials (and Directors of the board) were also reportedly afforded loans for business and other endeavors from the Grenada Development Bank, a bank whose purpose is to assist in the economic development of Grenada and so is authorized to act generally as an agent for the Government. The Bank is empowered by Section 12 of the Act (Grenada Development Bank Act, CAP 129) to borrow sums required for meeting any of its obligations or discharging any of its functions. The same act which prohibits loans to, “ a director of the bank, to a member of the legislature of the state of Grenada or to any company controlled by any such director or member of the legislature or to the close relatives of any such director or member of the legislature.”, as stated in [Section 29, SRO 2 of 1973] no.5.
Another Disaster
Just two years in office and the new government is faced with their biggest challenge yet, the infrastructural and economic recovery of the tri-island state of Grenada, Carriacou and Petite Martinique after the devastation of Hurricane Beryl.
Luckily, the former New National Party (NNP) government of Grenada with foresight had played a pivotal role in the formation of the Caribbean Catastrophe Risk Insurance Facility (CCRIF) in 2007. Understanding the Caribbean’s vulnerability to hurricanes, earthquakes, and other natural disasters, the NNP saw CCRIF as a necessary financial mechanism to protect the region’s economies from severe economic shocks. Grenada, having suffered from the devastating impacts of Hurricane Ivan in 2004 and Hurricane Emily in 2005, was among the countries that championed the need for a regional risk insurance pool to mitigate future disasters.
Grenada, under the NNP government, took out several policies under the CCRIF, including hurricane, earthquake, coast (fisheries sector) policy and excess rainfall coverage. Electricity and Water utilities policies established later (2023) were subcribed to by the present NDC government. Notably, the country’s proactive engagement with CCRIF bore fruit in 2024 when Grenada received a significant payout.
Policies Triggered: All CCRIF policies for Grenada were triggered following Hurricane Beryl.
Payouts:
Electricity - Grenada Electricity Services Limited (GRENLEC) received a payout of approximately EC$25.1 million (US$9.3 million) from CCRIF.
Water - National Water and Sewerage Authority (NAWASA) received a payout of EC$5.9 million (US$2.2 million) as part of the overall payout to the Government of Grenada.
Government - The Government of Grenada received payouts totalling approximately EC$118 million (US$44 million) from CCRIF, including the payouts for the electric and water utility sectors.
Policy Dates:
CCRIF’s parametric insurance product for electric utilities was launched in 2020, and Grenlec (formerly morjority pravately owned) became a member in 2023 as it was now a fully state owned enterprise.
The parametric insurance product for the water utility sector was launched in September 2023.
At the heart of this recovery strategy is the recent payout from CCRIF, a financial lifeline that is expected to catalyze the rebuilding efforts in the hardest-hit areas. In addition to the CCRIF funds, the government has received other financial aid, material and food aid, and human resource assistance from regional and international partners. The government must be committed to utilizing these funds and aid strategically to not only restore damaged infrastructure but also to enhance resilience against future climatic adversities.
Officials have indicated that a significant portion of the CCRIF payout will be allocated to restoring critical infrastructure, such as roads, bridges, and public buildings, which are vital for facilitating access to services and ensuring the smooth flow of economic activities. Beyond immediate repairs, there is an emphasis on incorporating sustainable practices in the rebuilding process, with investments in green technologies and resilient designs aimed at mitigating future disaster risks.
The government holistic recovery strategy needs to reflects a broad commitment to rebuilding Grenada’s economy, particularly in sectors like agriculture and tourism, which are crucial for the island’s long-term sustainability. It must also seek to develop or enhance additional sector that are more resilient to disasters and economic downturns, like Technology and IT Services, Healthcare services, Resilient and Sustainable Agriculture, Financial Services, etc. By leveraging the CCRIF payout alongside additional assistance, the government should foster economic diversification, create job opportunities, and enhance the overall resilience of the community. This comprehensive approach is not just about recovery but about laying a robust foundation for future growth, ensuring that Grenada emerges stronger in the face of adversity for the benefit of all citizens.
Conclusion: The Rhymes of History or Deeper Crisis?
The political trajectory of Grenada, particularly in the context of the 2022 election, underscores the old adage that history may not repeat, but it certainly rhymes. The parallels between Maurice Bishop in 1979 and Dickon Mitchell in 2022, and between the NDC’s promises in 2008 and 2022, reflect a recurring theme in Grenadian politics: the cyclical nature of hope, disappointment, and the quest for change. The 2022 NDC government must carefully navigate the challenges ahead to avoid repeating the mistakes of its predecessors. Failure to do so could lead to a deepening of the economic and social crises facing Grenada, and potentially erode public trust in the democratic process itself.
As the NDC government continues to navigate its term in office, it faces a critical choice between adhering to the principles of good governance or succumbing to the temptations of opportunism. While the government has made some positive strides, the growing concerns about cronyism, lack of transparency, and opportunistic policy-making suggest that it may be drifting away from its campaign promises of accountability and ethical leadership. It risks not only losing the trust of the electorate but also undermining the very foundations of Grenada’s democratic institutions. The government must take urgent steps to restore public confidence by demonstrating a genuine commitment to good governance, ensuring that its actions are guided by the long-term interests of the nation rather than short-term financial or political gains.
As Grenada moves forward, the lessons of the past serve as a reminder that true transformation requires more than just rhetoric — it requires sustained, transparent, and accountable governance that can withstand the pressures of both domestic challenges and global uncertainties.
At this midterm juncture, some questions that should be asked are:
From a historical perspective, what period of time was the country going through a similar kind of crisis and managed it so as to minimise as much pain and suffering of the people as possible?
and secondly …
Who is going to bring the country together, with sensible bipartesan programs and good management of the country?