Deputy Prime Minister and Tourism Minister Dr Ernest Hilaire has defended the new partnership between Saint Lucia and Arsenal Football Club, but has declined to share the cost of the deal that makes the island a destination partner for the English champions.
During a pre-Cabinet briefing on Monday, June 22, Hilaire said he would share more details about the agreement in the House of Assembly on Tuesday, June 23. He rubbished reports that the deal cost between £20 million (EC71.5 million) and £40 million, saying he is “not going to comment on those figures”.
Hilaire explained that details of commercial agreements like this are usually kept confidential to protect the country’s negotiating position.
“People elect government to make decisions, to represent them, to act on their behalf, and in their best interest, and therefore, one does not expect every agreement to be made public,” he argued.
“There are times when you need to do so, and you’ll be required to do so, and you should do so. But if you start releasing all the details of your agreements, you’ll have developers, and foreign entities, and governments, and other business partners who will not want to deal with you.”
Hilaire said the agreement with the North London club will be funded by the Saint Lucia Tourism Authority. This is the same approach used for other sports tourism projects, like the Saint Lucia Kings and West Indies Cricket.
He said the “visionary” deal is valuable for Saint Lucia. He recalled that over 20 years ago, when he was Permanent Secretary in the Department of Sports, there was opposition to the construction of what is now the Daren Sammy Cricket Ground. Since then, the stadium has hosted several World Cup matches, and he believes national cricket has grown stronger.
“We have taken Saint Lucia, and we are seeking to position it where people globally, in multiple areas, see Saint Lucia as a preferred destination for investment,” Hilaire said. “The networking we’ve created just through the relationship we are building with Arsenal; it’s phenomenal.”
Hilaire said the current administration has reviewed the numbers, calculated the return on investment, and done feasibility studies for the deal. He is confident that the partnership with one of the world’s top 10 clubs will bring results.
“I just came from the Arsenal partners summit in Munich at adidas headquarters, where all their partners met over three days; we will be hosting it in Saint Lucia. So you think of 35 of the biggest entities in the world coming to Saint Lucia to discuss relationships and whatnot,” he said.
Arsenal is owned by American billionaire Stan Kroenke, who also owns the Los Angeles Rams, Denver Nuggets, Colorado Avalanche, and Colorado Rapids. Hilaire said the Kroenke group has “a business model that works, that has been successful”.
Hilaire said one direct benefit for Saint Lucia is the creation of an academy hub for players “from throughout the Caribbean”. He also mentioned plans for a Saint Lucian women’s club team to play in the Let Her Inspire You Cup in London and said national teams could train at the Arsenal Training Facility before regional and international competitions.
By industry standards, it costs a minimum of 10 million pounds per season to be destination partner for a football club of Arsenal’s stature. Let’s not pretend that we don’t know there is a significant financial cost to St. Lucia involved in this deal; and there’s no guarantee that we will come close to recouping such a huge outlay based on this being a multiyear deal. Visit Rwanda pulled out of renewal talks with Arsenal because a more reasonable cost than what they had been paying for almost 8 years now could not be negotiated ( and we’re talking close to 18 million pounds per season here!). Good intentions or not, I don’t foresee this lavish spending paying the required dividends to at least break-even!
Wait! You spending my money and you don’t want to tell me the details. What kind of corrupt nonsense is this?
It’s only fair that the people know where and how their money is spent. Please provide that information earnestly
I highly disagree with “People elect government to make decisions, to represent them, to act on their behalf, and in their best interest, and therefore, one does not expect every agreement to be made public,”
This is precisely why EVERY agreement you agree on my behalf should be disclosed to me.
I agree not all elements of the agreement needs to be disclosed but for crying out loud the cost to people should be disclosed.
Transparency