Nevis Remains Empty-Handed Three Years After Government Change: PM Drew Withholds World Bank Fair Share Report

The political landscape of Nevis is rife with irony as Premier Mark Brantley, who ascended to power on a platform of securing Nevis’ “fair share” of Citizenship by Investment (CBI) revenues, now finds himself struggling to deliver on that very promise. Brantley’s political trajectory hinged on his vehement critique of the previous administration led by Dr. Timothy Harris, accusing them of systematically shortchanging Nevis. This resonated deeply with Nevisians who felt their island was being economically exploited. His rhetoric, fueled by claims of economic injustice and a desire for greater autonomy, propelled him to victory. However, three years into his tenure, the promised “fair share” remains elusive, leaving Nevisians questioning Brantley’s commitment and effectiveness.

The current state of affairs is a stark contrast to Brantley’s campaign pledges. He successfully positioned himself as the champion of the Nevisian people, vowing to rectify the perceived historical injustices and secure their rightful portion of the CBI proceeds. His accusations against the Harris administration struck a chord, painting a picture of a predatory St. Kitts exploiting the resources of its smaller sister island. This narrative resonated with a population eager for economic progress and a stronger sense of self-determination. Yet, despite achieving the premiership, Brantley’s administration has failed to deliver on this central promise, triggering accusations of hypocrisy and broken trust.

Adding to the growing discontent is the mystery surrounding the World Bank report, commissioned to provide a definitive analysis of Nevis’ entitlement to CBI revenues. The report, received in early March 2025, remains largely undisclosed. While Premier Brantley claims it has been shared with the Nevis Island Administration (NIA), its contents have not been made public, nor has any concrete action been taken based on its findings. Brantley cites scheduling conflicts and cabinet absences as reasons for the delay, an explanation that rings hollow to many Nevisians who see it as a tactic to avoid addressing the issue directly. The lack of transparency fuels speculation and distrust, with critics questioning the motives behind the secrecy and whether the report contains information detrimental to either the Nevisian or federal government.

The public’s patience is wearing thin as the “fair share” debate continues to stagnate. Social commentators, like Dr. Kelvin Daly, have become increasingly vocal in their criticism of Brantley’s inaction. Daly accuses Brantley of using the “fair share” issue as a political tool to gain power, rather than a genuine commitment to Nevisian economic well-being. He points to the lack of legislative action during Brantley’s seven years in the previous Team Unity government, where despite holding a position of power, no constitutional amendments were introduced to codify the fair share principle. This perceived lack of follow-through has led to accusations of political opportunism and a betrayal of the public’s trust.

The ongoing silence and lack of tangible progress have raised several critical questions. Why hasn’t the NIA, under Brantley’s leadership, taken concrete steps to legally enshrine Nevis’ share of the CBI revenues? Why has there been no formal push in Parliament to secure these entitlements? And what, specifically, does the World Bank report contain that both the federal and Nevisian governments seem so reluctant to disclose? The perception of a “conspiracy of silence” between the two governments only serves to deepen suspicions. The lack of transparency and the absence of a clear timeline for action feed into the growing narrative of broken promises and political maneuvering.

The pressure on Premier Brantley is mounting, not from the federal government in Basseterre as he might have anticipated, but from his own constituents. The very people who championed his cause and propelled him to power now demand accountability. The “fair share,” once a rallying cry for change, has become a symbol of unfulfilled promises and a potential stain on Brantley’s legacy. The premier’s initial response to the growing criticism, citing logistical challenges and scheduling conflicts, is viewed by many as a dismissive attempt to deflect responsibility. The people of Nevis are no longer satisfied with rhetoric and assurances; they demand concrete action and tangible results, a fulfillment of the promise that brought Brantley to power. The future of his political career may well depend on his ability to deliver on the “fair share” he so passionately advocated.