As Saint Lucia approaches the 2025 General Election, the two major political parties have set out contrasting visions for the nation’s path forward.
The United Workers Party has issued a 78‑page manifesto, a comprehensive “roadmap” built around broad policy reforms and institutional restructuring. The Saint Lucia Labour Party, by contrast, has presented a 35‑page document, a concise set of commitments focused on community priorities and incremental improvements.
One manifesto seeks to redesign systems at scale. The other concentrates on strengthening what already exists.
Despite these stylistic differences, both parties address the same pressing concerns: healthcare, education, crime, tourism, agriculture, the rising cost of living, and opportunities for young people. Where they diverge is in emphasis, scope, and the type of interventions they believe will best serve Saint Lucia’s future.
Crime and citizen security
If there is one area where both parties treat the moment as urgent, it is crime. Each party approaches the problem from a different angle, but the shared message is clear: Saint Lucia cannot afford more of the same.
The UWP outlines a far-reaching security plan anchored in its Relief, Recovery, and Reform framework. Their proposals include a Border Control Authority, a Crime Investigation and Forensic Unit, expansion of the K9 Unit, a strengthened CCTV network, updated legislation, and increased police training. They also frame crime as a public-health issue, calling for early-intervention programmes, youth outreach and community rehabilitation.
The SLP also prioritises crime reduction but frames its commitments more tightly. They highlight continued investment in the Royal Saint Lucia Police Force, including additional manpower, upgraded infrastructure and vehicles, enhanced forensic capability, and greater support for youth and community programmes aimed at early crime prevention.
The difference lies in scale: the UWP leans towards redesigning major parts of the security architecture, while the SLP focuses on strengthening existing systems and intervening early to reduce crime at its roots.
Economy and cost of living
If there is a single issue Saint Lucians feel every day, it is the cost of living.
The SLP puts forward stabilisation measures centred on supporting vulnerable families, strengthening social protection, and maintaining efforts to keep the price of essential goods stable. Their approach builds on existing programmes and includes employment initiatives and support for small businesses.
The UWP’s cost-of-living plan sits within its SOS Plan, which promises immediate relief through the removal of the 2.5% Health and Security Levy, reduced fuel prices, elimination of the dam dredging fee, and free tertiary education. Their broader economic strategy is investment-driven, with a heavy focus on infrastructure-led recovery and incentives to stimulate business growth.
Tax relief or targeted support, investment-led growth or social stabilisation — what matters now is which approach voters believe will ease the strain fastest and most sustainably.
Healthcare
Healthcare is one of the most developed sections of both manifestos and a clear point of overlap.
Both parties commit to major facility upgrades and both identify Soufrière as the site of a new district hospital.
The SLP pledges to strengthen universal healthcare coverage, expand mental-health support, modernise primary and secondary care, and improve public-health programmes across communities. Their plans build on ongoing improvements, including better screening, chronic-disease management, and stronger environmental health systems.
The UWP proposes a deeper system overhaul. Their plans include a National Health Insurance scheme, a comprehensive Health Information Management System, real-time digital insurance claims, modernised wellness centres, and a second new district hospital in Dennery. They also highlight improved working conditions for nurses and other healthcare professionals.
One path builds on what exists, the other rebuilds from the ground up, but both acknowledge that healthcare is no longer a sector where half-measures will do.
Tourism
Tourism remains the country’s economic backbone. Therefore it is no surprise that both manifestos lean heavily on the industry.
The SLP commits to strengthening sustainable tourism, upgrading sites and attractions, expanding community tourism, and deepening links between tourism and agriculture. Their approach focuses on improving the visitor experience, while ensuring that communities and small businesses benefit more directly.
The UWP takes a broader diversification approach. They aim to expand village tourism, attract more branded hotels, strengthen sports tourism, wellness tourism, and cultural tourism, and improve global marketing. They also emphasise opportunities for locals to earn more through the tourism value chain.
Education
Few sectors shape a nation’s long-term future as directly as education.
The SLP focuses heavily on early-childhood development and classroom modernisation. Their commitments include universal preschool access, more smart classrooms, expanded special education, mental-health services in schools, and national digital literacy programmes starting at the primary level. They also highlight stronger university partnerships to widen access to tertiary qualifications.
The UWP focuses on aligning education with employment and national development. Their proposals include re-engaging boys in the school system, expanding TVET programmes, accredited industry internships, strengthening post-secondary institutions in the south, and second-chance education for adults. Their emphasis leans toward building a skilled workforce ready for new and emerging industries.
Agriculture and food security
In recent years, agriculture has returned to the centre of national conversation, driven by concerns over food security, climate change and the cost of imported goods. Both manifestos treat the sector with a seriousness that reflects its growing importance.
The SLP proposes a sector built on stronger farmer capacity, youth involvement, expanded market access, and climate resilience. Their vision includes training programmes, increased use of technology on farms, and closer links between agriculture and tourism to strengthen local purchasing.
The UWP outlines a broader modernisation plan anchored in a National Land Bank, expanded irrigation networks, agro-processing hubs, upgraded farm roads, and targeted support for crops such as cocoa, honey, tropical fruits and bananas. They also propose a pension scheme for banana farmers and one-off payments to families of deceased farmers.
Creative industries
The creative industry receives more attention than in any recent election cycle.
The UWP proposes a structured creative-sector rollout that includes a Creative Arts and Convention Centre, islandwide creative hubs, seed funding and updated intellectual-property legislation. They outline institutions and laws that would formalise and drive the sector’s expansion.
The SLP integrates creatives into its wider youth and entrepreneurship agenda. Their commitments include support for creative start-ups, youth-focused hubs and opportunities for young people to produce and monetise digital content.
The question of funding
No matter the vision or the style of presentation, one reality sits at the centre of both manifestos: the need for sustainable financing. Every upgrade to healthcare, every improvement in citizen security, every investment in digital infrastructure or education, depends on how these plans are funded and how efficiently the state can deliver them.
The SLP, with its tighter set of commitments, leans heavily on improving efficiency, strengthening existing programmes, and continuing projects already underway. Many of its proposals build on systems that are already in motion, suggesting a reliance on the current budget structure, sector partnerships and gradual scaling, rather than major new injections of capital. It is an approach that reflects steady investment and controlled expansion within the government’s existing financial reach.
The UWP, with a broader and more ambitious policy slate, puts forward plans that would require significant resources and structural shifts. Their manifesto frames funding through economic recovery initiatives, a push for investor confidence and large infrastructure-led development. The Recovery and Reform programmes point to attracting external investment, expanding revenue streams, and reorganising parts of the public sector to make delivery more efficient.
For both sets of proposals, the challenge is the same: ensuring that the country can afford what is promised.
