Chastanet: UWP review to finish in six months, leadership decision at convention

After last year’s crushing election defeat, Allen Chastanet says it may take another six months before the opposition United Workers Party (UWP) completes a review aimed at determining the party’s direction.

That wide-ranging review will explore the reasons behind the party’s second loss, focusing on internal dynamics, voter turnout and electoral integrity. Insights will guide decisions at the forthcoming convention, including potential leadership changes.

Describing last year’s defeat as “difficult”, Chastanet told St Lucia Times in an interview that it is a loss both he and the party have come to terms with.

“I take responsibility because I was the head,” he said. “Whether I was directly involved or not….”

The 2026 loss was among the party’s most dramatic. Chastanet alone kept his seat – a UWP stronghold since John Compton’s time. The winning Saint Lucia Labour Party took 14 seats, while Independents Stephenson King and Richard Frederick won the other two. 

Shortly after the election, Chastanet announced his resignation as party leader, but this was quickly followed by another notice confirming his reappointment. 

Now, the leader of the government’s main opposition says a longer-term decision on leadership will be guided by a thorough internal review of the party and addressed at its next convention, a process he insists will unfold without his interference.

“At the convention, the decision we make in terms of whether there’s going to be a change of leadership, whether we’re going to keep the same leadership, but right now that’s the discussion that has taken place, and to make sure there’s no undue emphasis, I can say that I have zero intentions of trying to manipulate the system in any way. I want the party to make a conscious, democratic decision as to what it wants to do moving forward.”

He projects the review will take another six months, focusing on party structure and last year’s general election, which he believes deserves close examination, though he stops short of making allegations.

“Because there are many of us who believe there was an influence in the elections, whether it is electoral list manipulation, whether there were significant financial influences, or a combination of all those. We need to be able to determine for ourselves what took place so that we can make sure that we’re prepared for it the next time in terms of the direction of the party.”

But external factors, he noted, are only one part of a multilayered situation, as internal fractures within the party became increasingly evident over time, culminating in a series of departures by stalwart members.

“We had it happen with Stephenson King, we just had Andy Daniel and Estephan…” Chastanet recalls. “We all understand some of the details, probably more than the public knows as to how those things happened and why they happened, but it’s something that requires reflection.”

Chastanet said the review will also grapple with broader questions about voter engagement and public confidence in the democratic process.

“Here we are today at 46 per cent, and we just saw an election in Barbados where only 30 per cent of the voters came out. So whether people are now tired of what we call democracy… how the system is working, and how they feel that they’re benefiting from the system, this is what the internal review has to do. It has to ask all these difficult questions and try to test its ability to come up with answers and to structure the party.”

Chastanet added that on the horizon could be a party rebuilt to better reflect public interest: “We’ll meet as a party at the convention as we usually do and determine what’s in the best interest of the people of this country… and certainly what’s in the best interest of the party.”