CLICK HERE TO JOIN OUR WHAT’S APP GROUP
The recent revelation by St Vincent and the Grenadines Prime Minister, Dr Ralph Gonsalves, about the construction of a new official residence for the Governor of the Eastern Caribbean Central Bank (ECCB) has ignited debate over governance, transparency, and the decision-making process within the ECCB.
At the heart of the matter is the reported EC$22 million expenditure on the project and the extent to which key stakeholders were informed or involved in its approval.
Who Approved the Project?
It is doubtful that the ECCB Governor, Timothy Antoine, could have unilaterally dictated such an expenditure without the approval of the Board of Directors. The ECCB operates under a clear governance structure where major capital projects require scrutiny and board signoff, including representatives from the eight Eastern Caribbean Currency Union (ECCU) member states.
Such an investment would have been discussed, assessed, and endorsed at various levels of decision-making, particularly at the Monetary Council, comprising the region’s finance ministers.
Tendering and Contract Awards
The tendering process for the ECCB Governor’s residence followed a structured approach. Brisbane Ogarro Alvaranga, a well-regarded regional architectural firm, was awarded the design contract.
Lennox Warner Partners, a leading construction company in St Kitts and Nevis, was awarded the contract. This confirms that the project was subject to a competitive bidding process, though further details on the selection criteria and the number of bidders involved remain to be disclosed.
Despite this structured process, concerns have been raised regarding the escalation of costs from the initial estimate of EC$7 million to the now-reported EC$22 million.
The public deserves clarity on what factors contributed to this nearly threefold increase. Was it due to additional security requirements, higher-than-expected construction costs, expanded scope, or inflationary pressures? A clear and detailed cost breakdown would help address these concerns and reassure that the project was managed efficiently.
Dr Gonsalves’ Letter and Position
One of the key queries to be raised is why Dr Gonsalves addressed his letter to Gaston Browne, the incoming chair of the Monetary Council in July 2025, rather than the current chair, Anguilla’s Cora Richardson Hodge, who recently won election.
Did Gonsalves believe she was too preoccupied with post-election governance, or was this a deliberate bypassing of Anguilla’s first female Premier?
Given Anguilla’s current leadership role in the ECCB Monetary Council, it would have been expected that she would be the primary recipient of such a critical correspondence.
Dr Gonsalves confirmed that he wrote a letter condemning the project (iWitness News). The letter, addressed to Antigua and Barbuda’s Prime Minister Gaston Browne, outlines concerns over the expenditure and questions the necessity of the residence at the reported cost (Times Caribbean).
Gonsalves raises concerns about financial prudence in the letter, arguing that the ECCB must exercise restraint in its spending. However, given the long-standing issue with the former governor’s residence and the procedural approvals granted for the new project, his criticism has sparked speculation about deeper political motives.
The Investment Perspective
An alternative view argues that the EC$22 million residence should be seen not as a lavish expense but as a strategic investment for the long-term benefit of the ECCB and its operations.
A recent analysis suggests that the new residence is designed to serve multiple purposes beyond housing the Governor—it is an asset meant to enhance the institution’s capacity for official functions, secure diplomatic engagements, and maintain a suitable representation for a regional financial institution (Kaiser’s House of Reading Pleasure).
This perspective contrasts with the ‘palace’ narrative, emphasising that the residence should be viewed within institutional infrastructure development, like other central banks worldwide that maintain official accommodations for their leadership.
The Condition of the Previous Residence
The historical context is crucial. The former Governor’s residence, occupied by the long-serving Sir Dwight Venner, was already deemed unsuitable when Dr Antoine assumed office in 2016.
The Bank was compelled to lease a private property for nearly a decade, as the existing residence was inadequate for modern occupancy, official hosting, and business functions.
Furthermore, the original property was later sold to a Russian buyer, eliminating any possibility of refurbishment. To suggest that Antoine is ‘building a palace’ ignores that a new residence was a long-overdue necessity.
Dr Gonsalves has suggested that, rather than serving as the official residence of the ECCB Governor, the property could be repurposed for alternative uses.
Among his proposals is the idea that the Government of St Kitts and Nevis could acquire the building to serve as the Governor-General’s official residence, even though an existing Government House already serves this function.
Another is to convert the property into a luxury tourism accommodation, such as an upscale Airbnb or rental property, given its location in a high-end residential district just outside Basseterre.
However, these proposals raise concerns about whether such a move would align with the ECCB’s institutional objectives and undermine the rationale behind the investment.
Unfair Targeting of the Governor
Blaming Antoine personally is misplaced.
As an institution, the ECCB does not operate at the whim of its Governor. Such an expenditure would have undergone Board-level approvals, making it a collective decision rather than an individual one.
This raises concerns about why the focus is on Antoine rather than the governance processes that sanctioned the project. If there is a concern about financial propriety, then scrutiny should be directed at the Board of Directors and the Monetary Council.
The controversy has also led to calls for Antoine’s resignation (The New Today), further highlighting the political nature of the discourse surrounding this issue.
Is Dr Gonsalves Seeking to Block Antoine’s Third Term?
Antoine was reappointed for a second term as ECCB Governor in February 2021 (OECS Pressroom). With his current term nearing its end, speculation is growing about whether Dr Gonsalves’ criticism of the governor and the residence project is part of a broader effort to prevent Antoine from securing a third term.
Given Gonsalves’s political weight within the ECCU, his opposition could shape the decision-making process when Antoine’s reappointment is discussed.
As Anguilla currently holds the chairmanship of the ECCB Monetary Council, Premier Richardson Hodge’s leadership could play a critical role in upcoming decisions regarding governance, transparency, and future appointments within the ECCB.
The Risk of Politicisation
In his letter to the editor, John A. Peters presents a broader critique of Dr Gonsalves’ approach, questioning why he has placed blame on multiple entities—including the Monetary Council, on which his own Minister of Finance sits, and the Board of Directors, where St Vincent and the Grenadines has representation.
“Dr. Gonsalves has blamed the Monetary Council on which his Minister of Finance sits, the Board of Directors on which the Director General of Finance of St Vincent and the Grenadines sits and has also conveyed that there was insufficient transparency on the part of the Governor on the cost of the project. He places full blame on the Governor for his appalling lack of judgment in his pursuit of apparent vainglory, a total lack of sensitivity or prudence, and the basket of failures warrants disciplinary action to be taken by the Monetary Council.”
Peters also highlights that Dr Gonsalves appears to suggest either repurposing the residence for other uses or forcing the Governor to resign:
“Dr. Gonsalves then proposes that the building be put to other uses as that is the only way to rescue the Governor’s job, or alternatively, the Governor should consider resignation. We are now in a situation where a sitting Prime Minister is calling for the resignation of the Governor of the Eastern Caribbean Central Bank.”
He warns that this could set a dangerous precedent, where regional leaders interfere in the governance of institutions that were deliberately insulated from political control.
“The OECS has done an outstanding job in isolating the various institutions from political interference, whether it is the Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court, the Eastern Caribbean Central Bank, or the OECS Secretariat. We have seen the maturity of our leaders in avoiding interference. It is here that I am profoundly disappointed in Dr. Gonsalves, whom I view as a regionalist.”
According to Peters, this matter should have been addressed at the level of the Monetary Council, rather than being publicly presented as an “absolute scandal” before the Board of Directors even had an opportunity to respond.
“This matter could have been dealt with differently at the Monetary Council level. Presenting this to the public as an ‘absolute scandal’ and passing judgment on the Governor without even allowing the Board of Directors an opportunity to provide the details is wrong.”
Peters closes with a strong warning about the slippery slope of politicisation:
“We are now sitting on the slippery slope of the politicisation of our OECS Institutions and immediate action is required to stop the slide.”
Unfortunately, as John A. Peters highlighted, the matter escalated into the public space as a scandal, overshadowing the fundamental governance and accountability issues.
“Mr. Timothy Antoine is a fine individual, he is, as Dr. Gonsalves admits, a rare quality. It would be very sad that an accomplished economist is lost due to this unfortunate decision of Dr. Gonsalves. The Monetary Council must therefore act promptly and provide clarification on this matter, which has now sadly entered the public space as a scandal.
We are now sitting on the slippery slope of the politicisation of our OECS Institutions and immediate action is required to stop the slide.”
This raises critical questions about the long-term independence of regional financial institutions and the extent to which political maneuvering could erode trust in their governance structures.
What is next?
This issue underscores the broader need for greater transparency in regional financial governance.
While constructing a new residence seems justifiable given the circumstances, the ECCB Board must fully disclose the project’s costs, necessity, and approval process.
Rather than a sensational attack on the Governor, the real question should be whether the proper oversight, consultation, and financial accountability mechanisms were upheld. As stakeholders in the region’s financial stability, the public deserves nothing less.
Julian Rogers is monitoring developments from his Caribbean home in Belize. Write to him at [email protected].
CLICK HERE TO JOIN OUR WHAT’S APP GROUP
CLICK HERE TO JOIN OUR WHAT’S APP GROUP
CLICK HERE TO JOIN OUR WHAT’S APP GROUP
CLICK HERE TO JOIN OUR WHAT’S APP GROUP
CLICK HERE TO JOIN OUR WHAT’S APP GROUP
CLICK HERE TO JOIN OUR WHAT’S APP GROUP
CLICK HERE TO JOIN OUR WHAT’S APP GROUP
Advertise with the mоѕt vіѕіtеd nеwѕ ѕіtе іn Antigua!
We offer fully customizable and flexible digital marketing packages.
Contact us at [email protected]
This controversy raises important questions about the priorities of the ECCB. When public funds are involved, transparency and accountability should be non-negotiable.
The lack of transparency surrounding the Governor’s residence is troubling. The people have a right to know how their resources are being spent, especially when it involves public institutions.
It’s one thing to defend the residence, but it’s another to do so without addressing the questions surrounding its expenditure. The public deserves more transparency, especially when it involves taxpayers’ money.
Governance requires more than just decision-making. It requires accountability. The ECCB’s handling of the Governor’s residence controversy could damage public trust if they don’t come forward with clearer answers.
Regardless of the reasoning behind the residence, the public deserves to see that those in positions of power are making decisions that align with ethical governance. Transparency here is essential.