United Progressive Party (UPP) Chair D Gisele Isaac has defended her party’s campaign following its general election defeat, pushing back against a detailed critique from political commentator Audley Phillip, who argued that internal problems significantly weakened the party.
Phillip, a political, social and current affairs analyst, said the UPP’s performance was “mainly due to internal disarray and a series of high-profile defections,” noting that at least five members joined the ruling Antigua and Barbuda Labour Party (ABLP) ahead of the April 30 polls.
He argued that the party now faces a broader crisis of confidence, suggesting that “the current electorate appears to have lost confidence in the party’s broader slate,” and warned that the UPP may need to “transition to extra-parliamentary leadership or conduct a significant internal overhaul” to remain relevant.
Phillip also pointed to the departure or silence of several prominent former members, including Bertrand Joseph, Chandlah Codrington, Errol Cort, Justin Simon, Namba Adams and Wilmoth Daniel, as evidence of deeper structural challenges within the party.
He added that many of the party’s recent candidates may need to “make way for fresh blood,” calling for early identification of new leadership figures as part of a rebuilding process.
Responding to those claims, Isaac questioned the basis for describing the UPP’s showing as a failure, insisting that the party executed a credible and responsible campaign.
“Further, why do you describe the UPP’s performance as ‘poor?’” she asked.
Isaac said that in the weeks leading up to the election, the UPP engaged voters through public meetings and door-to-door outreach, outlining its plans and programmes.
“In the four weeks to election, the UPP did everything a responsible party should do, including put out its plans and programs through public meetings and door-to-door engagement,” she said.
However, she suggested that voter behaviour may have been influenced by factors beyond policy and campaigning.
“The people showed a preference for what we didn’t do: distribute plywood and galvanize, electronic items, ‘scholarships’ and cash,” Isaac said.
Framing the outcome as a matter of voter choice, she added: “People made choices.”
Isaac also used an analogy to argue that the party’s efforts should not be judged solely by the result.
“A chef can prepare a meal, set the table and serve it. Because an invited guest does not show up, it doesn’t mean the chef or the meal was bad,” she said.
The exchange reflects emerging debate within and around the UPP following one of its most significant electoral defeats, which saw the ABLP secure 15 of the 17 seats in Parliament, leaving the opposition with a single seat.
Phillip’s analysis points to structural and organizational issues within the party, while Isaac’s response underscores a competing view that the campaign itself was sound and that the outcome was shaped by voter priorities.
The differing perspectives highlight the challenges now facing the UPP as it considers its future direction and leadership in the aftermath of the election.
Advertise with the mоѕt vіѕіtеd nеwѕ ѕіtе іn Antigua!
We offer fully customizable and flexible digital marketing packages.
Contact us at [email protected]
What nonsense am I reading? The question of performance is simply an objective indicator based on the results. If I get 100 percent for a subject in an examination it means my performance was good. It is not about my preparation for the examination, that is a fundamentally different question. So if the results of the recent general elections is ALP 15 seats and the UPP 1 seat, isn’t it logical to say that the performance of the winner was good and that of the loser poor. You do not need to be a student of Aristotelian Logic to come to that simple conclusion.
Numbers don’t lie ! ABLP voters came out and UPP could not mobilize their voters ! So if she cannot accept that their supporters have no confidence in them being ready to govern ….. then they may as well keep their head in the sand!
UPP presented de worst slate ever in de history of electoral politics in antigua. Of course dem would lose
The UPP Chairwoman hit the nail on the head, if people are seeking plywood and galvanize, electronic items, ‘scholarships’ and cash, then the UPP should apply this strategy of campaigning. Give out scholarships, assist with plywood and galvanize, donate tablets and smart devices and give a little cash where it’s needed.
As an ARDENT SUPPORTER of the UPP I beg to disagree with Giselle. I honestly felt the Campaign was below par, but that is just my opinion. Dwayne George team got in touch with my household even though I suspect they know I am not a supporter, not once did Shugy touched base. I will accept the political LARGESSE was a factor but we should have done much better. If we continue the same way we might as well call it quits. WE HAVE GOT TO FACE TRUTH
Gesille needs to.go.simple chupzzzzz
Shugy got elected then decided to spending more time partying than going parliament to do his work. N when he did show up to parliament, he and Serpent just sat there and didn’t even make any sensible contribution to the parliamentary debate in over 3 years. UPP need to get new candidates who actually want to work for the people, n not just party party party.