Dispute Over $80 Million Investment and $3 Million Debt at Christophe Harbour Leads to Power Outage and Land Swap Agreement.

The idyllic twin-island nation of St. Kitts and Nevis, renowned for its pristine beaches and burgeoning tourism sector, has found itself embroiled in a controversy surrounding the Christophe Harbour development, a luxury project promising billions in economic activity but leaving a trail of unpaid debts and unfulfilled promises. At the heart of the issue lies the stark contrast between the aggressive debt recovery efforts of the former Team Unity administration, led by Dr. Timothy Harris, and the perceived inaction of the current administration under Prime Minister Terrance Drew.

Under Harris’s leadership, the government took decisive action against Christophe Harbour, pursuing millions of dollars owed to various public institutions. One of the most dramatic moves was the disconnection of electricity supply to the development by the St. Kitts Electricity Company (SKELEC) due to arrears nearing EC $3 million. This bold maneuver, described as an act of political courage, prioritized national interests over foreign privilege and forced Christophe Harbour to negotiate a settlement, eventually offering three parcels of land valued at EC $4.5 million to restore power. The Harris administration didn’t stop there. They pursued legal action through the National Bank to recover EC $49 million in unpaid loans, issued demand letters for nearly EC $6 million owed to Social Security, and formally demanded US $20.4 million, including late charges, owed to the Sugar Industry Diversification Foundation (SIDF). They even commissioned an investigation by Ernst & Young into the SIDF’s investment ties to Christophe Harbour.

These actions signaled a clear message: the government was committed to holding Christophe Harbour accountable for its financial obligations to the people of St. Kitts and Nevis. The aggressive approach taken by the Harris administration reflected a determination to protect public resources and ensure that foreign investors did not operate with impunity. The disconnection of electricity, in particular, demonstrated a willingness to take drastic measures to safeguard the nation’s financial interests, sending a strong signal that non-payment of debts would not be tolerated. This assertive stance was lauded by many as a necessary step to protect taxpayers’ money and uphold the rule of law.

However, the landscape shifted dramatically with the change in government. Following the 2022 elections, the newly elected administration of Prime Minister Terrance Drew seemingly reversed course, halting the legal proceedings initiated by the National Bank and ceasing all public efforts to recover the outstanding debts. A veil of silence descended upon the issue, with no updates provided on the remaining balance owed to SKELEC, the outcome of Social Security’s debt negotiations, or the status of the SIDF’s multi-million-dollar claim. This abrupt shift in approach has raised significant concerns and fueled public speculation about potential backroom deals and a lack of transparency.

Further fueling public distrust is the recent sale of the Christophe Harbour marina to Safe Harbor Marinas. The lack of transparency surrounding this transaction has only amplified concerns. The Drew administration has not disclosed the terms of the sale, the amount of outstanding debts recovered (if any), or whether government institutions were represented at the closing. This silence has created a breeding ground for suspicion and fueled allegations that the government may have prioritized the interests of foreign investors over the financial well-being of the nation. Critics argue that this lack of transparency contradicts the administration’s claims of championing open governance and accountability.

The contrasting approaches of the Harris and Drew administrations have sparked a heated public debate. While the Harris government’s actions were praised for their boldness and commitment to protecting public funds, the Drew administration’s perceived inaction has drawn criticism and accusations of a public betrayal. The lack of transparency surrounding the marina sale has only intensified the public’s demand for answers. The silence from the government has been deafening, leaving citizens to question whether the previous administration’s efforts to hold Christophe Harbour accountable have been quietly undone. The stark difference in approach between the two administrations has left many wondering about the motivations behind the current government’s apparent reluctance to pursue the outstanding debts.

As calls for a full public inquiry into the matter grow louder, the Drew administration finds itself under increasing pressure to address the public’s concerns. The people of St. Kitts and Nevis are demanding answers, seeking transparency and accountability from their government. The future of the Christophe Harbour development and the recovery of the substantial debts owed remain uncertain, casting a shadow over the nation’s economic landscape. The contrasting narratives of the two administrations have created a deep divide in public opinion, with many questioning the government’s commitment to transparency and accountability. The controversy surrounding Christophe Harbour continues to unfold, highlighting the complex relationship between foreign investment, national interests, and government responsibility in a small island nation.