As Grenadians prepare for another general election, the governing National Democratic Congress (NDC) has invited citizens to participate in shaping its next election manifesto. Citizen engagement is always welcome in a democracy. However, before asking the nation to help write another list of promises, many Grenadians believe the Government should first provide a transparent accounting of its record over the past four years.
The first question should not be, “What should we promise next?” It should be, “What have we delivered?”
A responsible government should publish a comprehensive review of its previous manifesto, outlining which commitments were fulfilled, which remain outstanding, and why. Citizens deserve more than campaign slogans – they deserve measurable results. Before presenting a new vision, the Government should present a report card.
Likewise, the nation deserves a comprehensive State of the Economy review. Families across Grenada are facing rising costs for groceries, electricity, transportation, housing, and everyday necessities.
Many consumers feel that the increase in the cost of living has been dramatic, with some estimating that overall household expenses have risen by approximately 25 percent or more over recent years.
Whether one agrees with that figure or not, few would deny that life has become significantly more expensive for ordinary Grenadians.
Infrastructure tells another story. From St. George’s to St. Patrick, from St. Andrew to St. Mark, motorists and commuters continue to navigate deteriorating roads, potholes, failed drainage systems, and unfinished repair works.
Despite significant public expenditure, many road projects appear to suffer from delays, poor workmanship, repeated reconstruction, and weak contract management. Taxpayers have every right to ask whether they are receiving value for money.
These concerns extend beyond the road network. Questions continue to be raised about the management and execution of government-funded construction projects, including public buildings requiring repairs and modernisation.
The prolonged condition of the Ministry of Finance building serves as one visible reminder that critical government infrastructure has not been addressed with the urgency many expected.
The much publicised “Build Back Better” programme also deserves an independent public review.
Grenadians should know how funds were allocated, what projects were completed, whether objectives were achieved, and whether lessons have been learned for future disaster recovery initiatives.
Agriculture, once a cornerstone of Grenada’s economy, has also become an area of concern for many rural communities. Farmers continue to face rising production costs, marketing challenges, and uncertainty about institutional support.
The closure of the Marketing and National Importing Board’s traditional role in supporting agricultural marketing has left many producers questioning whether adequate replacement mechanisms have been put in place. Food security should remain a national priority, not an afterthought.
Social programmes have similarly come under scrutiny. Many citizens continue to express concern over the apparent decline or restructuring of assistance previously available to vulnerable elderly citizens under the former Poor Relief programme.
While reforms may be necessary from time to time, those most in need should never feel abandoned by the very system designed to protect them.
The management of NAWASA infrastructure projects has also generated public discussion. Water interruptions, extended construction timelines, damaged roads following utility works, and questions surrounding project coordination have all contributed to growing frustration.
Greater transparency and stronger accountability would help restore public confidence.
Healthcare remains perhaps the most important issue facing the country. Grenadians were promised a modern healthcare system capable of meeting the demands of the twenty-first century.
While ambitious projects have been announced, many citizens continue to ask whether priorities have been properly aligned.
Instead of investing heavily in new concepts and significant expenditures on land acquisition and professional consultancy services, many believe greater emphasis should have been placed on upgrading existing institutions such as Princess Alice Hospital and Princess Royal Hospital.
Strengthening these facilities could significantly improve healthcare delivery for residents in rural communities while providing immediate benefits to thousands of citizens.
Similarly, medical centres throughout the country should be fully operational, adequately staffed, properly equipped, and consistently supplied. Healthcare should not depend upon geography or political promises.
Leadership also requires results. The Prime Minister has represented Grenada internationally on numerous occasions, promoting the country’s interests abroad and participating in regional and international forums.
However, many Grenadians are asking a simple question: What tangible benefits have these engagements produced for the average citizen? International diplomacy is important, but its success should ultimately be measured by improvements in jobs, investment, healthcare, education, infrastructure, and the overall quality of life at home.
As the election approaches, this should not simply be a contest of speeches, advertisements, and campaign rallies. It should be a referendum on performance.
Before asking the people of Grenada to endorse another manifesto, the Government should provide:
- A comprehensive review of its 2022 election manifesto.
- A detailed State of the Economy report.
- Public accountability for major infrastructure and capital projects.
- An independent assessment of the Build Back Better programme.
- A transparent review of healthcare investments and outcomes.
- A clear explanation of the future direction for agriculture and rural development.
- Measurable evidence of the economic benefits arising from international engagements.
Democracy works best when governments are judged not only by their promises but by their performance.
Ultimately, every voter must make his or her own decision at the ballot box. That decision should be based on facts, evidence, accountability, and results—not simply on campaign rhetoric.
If the Government wishes to write a new chapter, it should first be prepared to account for the last one.
Only then can Grenadians fairly decide whether the National Democratic Congress deserves another contract—or whether it is time to issue a political “Pink Slip.”
The Pink Slip Man