Bradley Thanks Choiseul-Saltibus – The Journey Continues with Flex!

Four years in opposition have been no easy road, Bradly laments; they have tested his strength, sharpened his vision, and deepened his love for the people of Choiseul-Saltibus. He continues, "Yet, here I stand—stronger, more determined, and more fired up than ever before!"

"To every single person who stood in line, braving the heat, the wait, and the uncertainty just to place that powerful “X” for Flex—I THANK YOU." He is very much aware that trust is not taken lightly and that each vote was not just a mark on a ballot, but a voice declaring that Choiseul-Saltibus deserves leadership with heart, courage, and unwavering dedication.

This journey is far from over. In fact, it’s only the beginning of the next chapter. "The fire still burns within me, the mission to serve and uplift this community still lives on, and the love I have for you—my people—remains unshakable!" Flex reiterates

Flex reminds his constituents that they have weathered storms before, and together, we will rise again. Like the sun that sets only to rise brighter and stronger at dawn, Flex is ready to rise for Choiseul-Saltibus!

Bradly is confident that as we continue this program of progress, unity, and empowerment, he promises this: "Our best days are ahead. With your continued support, we will build on the foundation we’ve started and create a future that every Choiseul-Saltibus resident can be proud of."

The journey continues, the passion is alive, and together, we will make it happen.

Flex 💛

"The sun sets only to rise again. We will rise again!"

Living on Crown Land for 30+ Years? Here's What You Need to Know…

There’s been a lot of talk lately about people who have been living on Crown land (government land) for decades. Some believe that after 30 years, the land becomes theirs automatically. But let’s set the record straight:

Under the law of Saint Lucia, this is not true.

Even if you've lived on Crown land for 30, 40, or even 50 years — that land does not become yours unless the government gives you legal permission or a title.

So what happens to long-time squatters?

From time to time, the government may run programs to “regularize” these situations. That means: ✅ Offering people a chance to buy the land at a reduced cost

✅ Helping with official documents or leases

✅ Granting legal title in special cases

BUT — this is not a right, and it doesn’t happen automatically. It’s more like a special offer or amnesty. The government is not legally required to give you the land — it’s a choice they make to help regularize informal settlements.

A Bottom Line:

Living on Crown land for decades doesn’t make you the owner.

Only the government can give you legal title.

If you’ve been living on Crown land for many years, look out for official government programs and take advantage of them when they come!

Help spread the truth. Let’s all stay informed and encourage each other to work within the law.

#CrownLand #KnowYourRights #StLuciaLaw #HousingFacts #PublicAwareness #RayneauOnTheMove

Why Students Are Failing Math—and What We’re Getting Wrong

Picture this:

The school bell hasn’t rung yet, and a group of students is huddled over a notebook, frantically copying down last night’s math homework. Not because they didn’t care to do it, but because somewhere along the way, they were taught that points matter more than understanding. That ticking a box is more important than mastering a concept.

Sound familiar?

It should. It’s the daily reality in too many classrooms across the St Lucia—and it's a significant factor behind the concerning trends in Math performance in recent CPEA exams.

Let’s be honest. Math isn't the enemy here. It's the system.

Just ask any frustrated student who scored poorly despite putting in hours of homework… or any burnt-out teacher grading yet another worksheet filled with guesswork instead of real growth.

The truth is, we’ve built a school culture obsessed with compliance.

Finish the homework. Memorize the method. Ace the test.

And if you don’t? Well, better luck next time.

But here's a radical idea—what if we threw that tradition out the window?

That’s what one teacher, Jake, did. No more one-and-done tests. No more homework that students rushed through or copied at the last minute. Instead, he built a classroom based on feedback, retakes, and most importantly—growth.

And guess what?

The results were everything we hoped for in Math education.

Higher test scores. More confident students. And teachers who weren’t running on empty.

The Numbers Don’t Lie

Recent data from Saint Lucia's 2024 CPEA results highlight the issue. While the overall national mean improved to 77.08%, the Math scores told a different story. The national mean for Mathematics was 73.09%, lagging behind other subjects like Science, Language, and Social Studies, which all scored above 77.9% .

This stagnation in Math contrasts with significant improvements in other subjects, indicating a systemic issue in how we approach Math education.

So why are so many of our classrooms still stuck?

Because we’re clinging to a system that’s not working.

A system where students are racing for grades—not understanding.

Where fear of failure is stronger than the desire to learn.

CPEA scores are telling us something. They’re a wake-up call.

Not that our kids aren’t smart. Not that they’re lazy.

But that we need to rethink how we teach Math.

Imagine a classroom where students can make mistakes without penalty. Where they can take a second shot at a concept, and actually get better because of it. Where learning is the goal—not just passing.

That’s the kind of shift we need. From points to progress.

From performance pressure to purpose-driven learning.

Because if we want different results, we have to dare to teach differently.

It’s not just about Math. It’s about giving our students a fighting chance to love learning again.

Call to Action:

Parents, engage with your child’s teacher about how feedback is utilized in the classroom. Teachers, consider implementing one small change toward growth-based learning next school year. It could make all the difference in how our children perform… and more importantly, how they learn.

PUTTING PIERRE FIRST - By Anonymous

Philip J Pierre

Tension is rising in Choiseul about who the selected candidate for the St. Lucia Labour Party will be for the forth-coming general elections. What started as ‘promising’ that four individuals had indicated their willingness to contest the seat became less so as a fifth individual joined the race long after the deadline for applications had been closed and the initial four individuals had been interviewed (at least once).

WHY WAS THE PROCESS REOPENED?

Anxiety immediately started growing once the latest application was accepted and the individual had been interviewed. Constituents then began asking various questions, among them:

Is the last applicant the preferred candidate of ‘the parry’?

What advantage(s) does the last applicant bring, given that he was the current district representative’s attaché?

Is it that the initial four candidates lack the social and political profile of ‘the party’?

It is fair to say that none of these questions has been answered either by the ‘the party’ or the constituents themselves.

THE IMPLICATIONS

Months after the intimal interviews, no announcements have been made regarding the situation as speculation and division grow among the constituents. Understandingly so, the memories of the last general elections have resurfaced with the emphasis again placed on the party executives’ disregard for the wishes of the local electorate. What has emerged is a complex web of possibilities none of which brings any advantage to the selected candidate at wining the incumbent parliamentary representative at the general elections as things stand on the ground. The key issues at play seem to be:

A GENUINE commitment on the parts of individual contestants to support whoever is selected.  Given that it is alleged that at least one contestant disclosed at an interview that he will not support the lone female contestant, genuine commitment seems unlikely.  

The publicly known fact that TWO of the current contestants, including the last contestant, DID NOT support the selected candidate in the last general elections certainly raises concern.

The CAPACITY of the individual contestants to influence their base to support the selected candidate whoever that may be, is also a mammoth challenge.

The EFFORT AND RESOURCES required to REUNITE a clearly divided local electorate, and in addition, TO FIGHT THE OPPOSITION  while can yield benefits will have to be tremendous. Petty roadside contracts may not suffice.

THE FINAL DECISION vs POPULAR CHOICE

Who becomes the selected candidate remains any body’s guess. But clearly, the only clue offered so far lies in the selectors’ decision to reopen the process of selection well after the set deadline. Whether or not facilitating/selecting that last contestant reflects popular choice is a different matter that matters a WHOLE LOT. So the hope is that the process reflects popular choice, which at the moment is very visibly NOT the last contestant. 

PUTTING THE PM FIRST

The catch phrase of the Prime minister has been PUTTING THE PEOPLE FIRST, and certainly, the many projects and initiatives of Prime Minister so far, reflect that mantra. So the expectation is that the phrase will hold for the people of Choiseul as it pertains to their preferred choice of candidate reflected by survey after survey. Until the outcome of the selection process i'm PUTTING PIERRE FIRST.

Editor's note : The author of this piece requested that his name be withheld.

In Defense of Boldness: Allen Chastanet's Call Wasn't Folly—It Was Leadership

 In its June 21 editorial, The Jamaica Gleaner painted St. Lucia’s Opposition Leader Allen Chastanet as a political maverick lost in a “twilight zone” for merely daring to question the effectiveness of CARICOM. But if asking uncomfortable questions that reflect the lived frustrations of many CARICOM member states is “folly,” then perhaps we need more of that so-called madness.

Let’s be honest: CARICOM, for all its noble ideals, has underperformed. Its well-documented “implementation deficit,” glacial pace of integration, and habit of overlooking the concerns of smaller member states are not myths—they are recurring frustrations. Mr. Chastanet, in speaking to fellow OECS leaders, voiced the silent discontent many leaders are too diplomatic—or too fearful—to utter. That is not recklessness. That is leadership.

The Right to Question

The editorial insists that Mr. Chastanet’s question—“Would we be better off negotiating bilateral agreements rather than remaining in CARICOM?”—is dangerous. But is it really? Asking whether CARICOM still works as intended is not the same as calling for its destruction. In fact, it is a necessary question that any responsible leader should be willing to examine—especially given the deepening challenges of regional inequality, climate change, food insecurity, and global political shifts.

Let us not forget that institutions must evolve or risk irrelevance. CARICOM was formed in 1973. Today’s geopolitical landscape, economic dynamics, and youth expectations are not the same. If CARICOM is beyond criticism, then it is already beyond saving.

A Voice for the Marginalized

Mr. Chastanet’s recollection of feeling disrespected and ignored during CARICOM deliberations is not an isolated complaint—it is a reflection of a structural imbalance in the regional bloc. Smaller states like those in the OECS often feel like silent partners in a conversation dominated by the more populous countries. If the voices of smaller members are not being taken seriously, what incentive is there to remain bound to a structure that doesn’t evolve?

Rather than attack the messenger, regional leaders and commentators ought to examine the message. Instead of dismissing Chastanet’s words as irresponsible, the region should ask why he—and many others—feel this way. Ignoring the problem doesn’t make it go away.

The Real Risk: Complacency

The Gleaner rightly points out that CARICOM is

 an “imperfect institution”—but then uses that as a shield against change. That logic is exactly why regionalism has stagnated. If not now, then when is the time to evaluate the usefulness of our institutions? And who better than someone who has sat at the highest levels of CARICOM decision-making to raise those questions?

Let’s also not overlook the irony: the same editorial admits Jamaica once withdrew from the West Indies Federation—yet still feels entitled to scold others for contemplating similar paths. Jamaica, too, knows what it means to question regional alliances when national interest is at stake.

A Wake-Up Call

Far from being a loose cannon, Allen Chastanet is acting as a catalyst for an overdue conversation. The Caribbean doesn’t need cheerleaders for the status quo. It needs leaders unafraid to challenge institutional inertia and spark debate about how we actually move forward—together or otherwise.

So no, Allen Chastanet hasn’t lost his way. He’s just walking a road fewer have the courage to tread.

Forgotten Communities, Forgotten People: A Wake-Up Call from Roblot, Choiseul

As a concerned citizen of Roblot, Choiseul, I cannot sit in silence any longer.

With general elections looming—constitutionally due in 2026 but rumored to be called earlier—it's time to reflect, reassess, and rise. For too long, we the people of La Maze, Debreuil, Roblot, and Riviere Dorée have been fed crumbs under the guise of development. We've been pacified with footpaths, drains, and temporary grass-cutting jobs, while our communities cry out for real transformation—education, empowerment, and opportunity.

Just take a look around.

In Roblot, our community center remains locked, untouched and underutilized. Built with taxpayer dollars, it sits there as a silent monument to broken promises—walled off from the very people it was intended to serve. What kind of leadership allows such a resource to lie idle in the face of growing unemployment, especially among our youth?

This isn’t just a Roblot issue. La Maze, Debreuil, and Riviere Dorée have suffered the same fate: neglected, under-resourced, and spoken about only when it’s time for votes. The cries of our young people are deafening. They are not lazy—they are idle because no one has given them the tools or opportunities to rise.

Instead of youth development programs, instead of skills training centers, what did we get?

A bar.

Yes, a bar—soon to be built on what was once prime government land near Choiseul Secondary School. Land that could have been transformed into a vocational training center, a small business incubator, a community IT hub—anything that contributes to the development of human capital. But that would’ve required foresight. That would’ve required politicians to put people over personal gain.

The problem isn’t a lack of resources. The problem is a lack of vision.

And now, as another election cycle creeps upon us, the same tired tactics will return. We’ll be told once again to vote for roads, for handouts, for favors. But we are not fools. We are not beggars. We are citizens with a right to thrive, not just survive.

It’s time we demand better.

What are these politicians offering for the advancement of the people—not just their party base, but the entire community? Where are the proposals for literacy and computer classes? Where are the workshops on entrepreneurship, agriculture, hospitality, and trades? Where are the plans for our youth, our single parents, our unemployed men and women?

If they have no plan for our development, then they are not worthy of our votes.

We must be vigilant. We must be bold. We must ask the tough questions and demand real answers—not flashy slogans or last-minute giveaways. The campaign trail will be noisy, but let us listen not to the volume of their voices, but to the substance of their message.

No more blind loyalty. No more empty promises. No more selling our dignity for a ride to town or a free t-shirt.

This time, Roblot, La Maze, Debreuil, and Riviere Dorée will not be silenced.

We will rise.

We will speak.

And we will vote not for politicians, but for progress.

🔴 SLP’s Choiseul/Saltibus Gamble: Back to the Drawing Board?

A little birdie tells us that the Saint Lucia Labour Party (SLP) has unofficially narrowed its focus to two potential candidates for the Choiseul/Saltibus seat in the upcoming general elections: Darrion and Pauline. If this is true, then it’s safe to say that the SLP is on course to hand the seat right back to incumbent Bradly Felix of the United Workers Party (UWP)—on a silver platter.

One fired-up SLP supporter didn’t mince words, quipping in full Kwéyòl:

"Bradly kay bat tousel Darrion ek Pauline an menm tan!"
Translation? Bradly will beat them jointly. Ouch.

Let’s unpack why this decision could be politically suicidal for the Labour camp.

Darrion: From Attaché to Candidate?

Many in the constituency know Darrion as the former loudest cheerleader for Bradly Felix—not just a supporter, but what some described as “Bradly’s attaché.” His sudden shift to Labour has left even SLP loyalists puzzled, with murmurs of hypocrisy and backstabbing swirling across La Fargue and beyond.

It doesn’t help that La Fargue—his own backyard—is reportedly lukewarm about his candidacy.
So, we must ask the hard question: does Darrion even have a base?
If he’s struggling to command the support of his own neighbors, how will he penetrate the UWP’s strongholds?

To quote a local observer:

Espoir Mal Papie!”
A hapless hope indeed.

Pauline: History Repeats Itself?

As for Pauline, let’s talk numbers:
In the 2016 General Election, she was defeated by Bradly Felix by over 400 votes—and that was with a full campaign and the momentum of being a fresh face.
Fast forward to 2025, and the landscape looks even dimmer.

Her disengagement with grassroots supporters over the last four years is a glaring red flag. Constituents whisper about her:

• Rare visits
• Poor delegation of responsibilities
• Recycling of contracts within the same inner circle
• Eroding trust from key community mobilizers

According to one influential foot soldier:

“Pauline wants to run the show alone. She doesn’t trust anyone with real responsibility.”

Even in her traditional strongholds in the eastern part of the constituency, support is said to be waning.

The Keithson Question: Why Bypass a Rising Star?

Now, here’s where it gets interesting.
Keithson Charles, who has made serious inroads into Bradly’s base, is being mysteriously sidelined. Why?

Yes, elections are near. Yes, a lot of work would need to be done to bolster his readiness. But Keithson was around before Darrion even blinked Labour red. So why this sudden leapfrogging?

Could it be political favoritism? Internal party dynamics? Or is SLP simply betting on the wrong horses?

Looking Ahead: December 8, 2025?

This blog strongly predicts the next general election will be held on Monday, December 8, 2025—timed to coincide with the handover of the St. Jude Hospital. With National Day falling that same weekend, the SLP will likely seek to turn victory (or survival) into a nationwide celebration from December 13–15.

But here’s the rub: If Darrion or Pauline is leading the charge in Choiseul/Saltibus, that “celebration” might just skip this constituency.

Final Thoughts

If the SLP is serious about reclaiming Choiseul/Saltibus, they need to rethink their strategy.
Darrion’s credibility issues and Pauline’s disconnection from her base won’t cut it. Bradly Felix may not be invincible—but he’s not beatable by default.

Labour, take heed:
Sometimes, the best way forward is to look within your ranks and ask not “who has the title?” but “who has the trust of the people?”

Otherwise, Bradly might just waltz back into office—unbothered, unbeaten, and unchallenged.

Stop the Madness! Political Oversight Isn’t a Crime — It’s a Duty”

This so-called commentary posted on St Lucia News Online is not only embarrassing in its logic, it's an insult to the intelligence of Saint Lucians. Let’s call this what it is — propaganda masquerading as public concern by so called "Caribbean Writers".

Let’s tear into this foolishness point by point:

1. "Political sabotage"? Really?
Since when is showing up at a construction site — a publicly funded site — considered sabotage? Is the public no longer allowed to question delays, check progress, or challenge the government on transparency? If Allen Chastanet is trespassing, say so and let the law handle it — don’t inflate it into some Mission Impossible movie plot.

2. "Dangerous escalation"? From what — visiting sites? Asking questions?
This article is riddled with fear-mongering, claiming Chastanet is "jeopardizing public safety." How exactly? With a camera crew and some tough questions? The real danger here is the suggestion that political leaders must stay silent or risk being branded enemies of the state.

3. “Strengthen security to stop him”?
This recommendation is laughable. We’re talking about public infrastructure funded by taxpayers. Is the government now building bunkers instead of hospitals? If these projects are so sensitive that an opposition leader showing up is a threat, what are you really hiding?

4. Irony, thy name is this article.
To accuse Chastanet of being desperate because he’s criticizing projects his government started or failed to finish — isn’t that just normal political accountability? Or is the Labour Party now allergic to scrutiny?

5. “This is not about politics.”
Please. This entire piece is dripping with partisanship. It reads more like a press release from a ruling party spin doctor than a credible piece of journalism. The dramatic language, the hollow praise of the government, and the complete absence of counterpoints scream bias.

 Bottom Line:

This isn’t journalism. It’s an attempt to paint legitimate political critique as terrorism. If a sitting opposition leader showing up to inspect government work is now "sabotage," then democracy itself is under threat — not from Chastanet, but from the authors of this nonsense.

Security shouldn’t be used as a shield to block public inquiry. If your projects are sound, let them stand up to scrutiny. If they’re not — well, no amount of fences and cameras will save you from public judgment.

Let’s keep our eyes on real sabotage: corruption, incompetence, and the silencing of dissent.

Let the people decide who’s desperate — we know the smell of fear when we see it in print.