Editorial · Citizenship by Investment
The Government Is Gambling With Something That Belongs to All of Us
Before the NDP government advances Citizenship by Investment, Vincentians deserve a clear answer on what selling access to the passport could eventually cost.
The Vincentian passport does not belong to the NDP. It does not belong to Godwin Friday. It does not belong to Cabinet. It belongs collectively to the citizens of St Vincent and the Grenadines, including generations yet unborn.
That is why any decision capable of affecting its international standing should be approached with extraordinary caution.
The government cannot simply calculate how many millions Citizenship by Investment might generate. It must also calculate the potential downside.
What is the value of visa-free access? What is the value of international confidence in a Vincentian passport? What would be the economic and personal cost to tens of thousands of Vincentians if new visa requirements were imposed? And once a country’s passport develops a reputation as an investment commodity, how easily can that reputation be reversed?
These are legitimate public-policy questions, not partisan ones.
Vincentians were warned about this debate
The former ULP government consistently rejected Citizenship by Investment. The NDP campaigned on introducing it. The electorate then gave the NDP an overwhelming parliamentary majority.
But winning an election does not remove the government’s obligation to explain itself when international circumstances change. A manifesto is not a suicide pact. If the risks surrounding CBI have materially increased, responsible government requires reassessment.
The Friday administration should therefore explain whether recent international developments have caused it to reconsider. If the answer is no, it should explain why.
The warning signs are not hypothetical
Two facts should concentrate minds in Kingstown.
First, the European Union has already shown it will act. Brussels fully suspended Vanuatu’s visa-free access in February 2023 over its golden-passport scheme, and formally removed Vanuatu from the Schengen visa-exempt list in December 2024. The United Kingdom imposed visa requirements on Vanuatu in July 2023. A passport once marketed for its mobility lost precisely the access that made it attractive.
Second, the climate is tightening in real time. Regulation (EU) 2025/2441 came into force on 30 December 2025, widening the bloc’s Visa Suspension Mechanism and naming investor-citizenship schemes as a ground for suspending visa-free travel. The Commission’s own 8th report under that mechanism, published in December 2025, went further still, stating that operating an investor-citizenship programme may in itself amount to grounds for suspension. On 25 June 2026, the European Commission wrote to five Eastern Caribbean states, namely Antigua and Barbuda, Dominica, Grenada, St Kitts and Nevis, and St Lucia, asking them to phase out their programmes by 1 June 2028 or risk losing Schengen access. Those five governments met in Roseau on 10 July 2026 and agreed to respond collectively. The Commission’s next report on the mechanism is due in December 2026.
St Vincent and the Grenadines was not on that list, for one simple reason. It does not yet operate a programme.
The NDP would be opening the door to CBI at the very moment Brussels is trying to close it across the region.
The question is bigger than CBI
Ultimately, this debate is about what kind of country SVG wants to build.
Do we build national wealth by strengthening agriculture, fisheries, tourism, technology, renewable energy, manufacturing, the blue economy, education, entrepreneurship and our human capital? Or do we increasingly treat citizenship itself as an economic product?
There may be money to be made from CBI. Nobody should pretend otherwise. But responsible governance requires asking another question. What could that money eventually cost us?
The NDP government cannot responsibly sell CBI to Vincentians on the promise of revenue alone. It must disclose the risks. It must explain the safeguards. It must tell us what discussions it has held with the European Union, the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada and other important partners about the proposed programme. And it must explain what happens to ordinary Vincentians if this gamble goes wrong.
Because the people who purchase Vincentian citizenship may hold other passports, other countries in which they can live, and other options. Ordinary Vincentians may not.
That is why this decision must never be reduced to how much money the government believes it can raise. The real question is much bigger.
Is the money from selling access to Vincentian citizenship worth putting the value, reputation and mobility of the Vincentian passport at risk?
Before the NDP government proceeds any further, every Vincentian deserves a clear answer.
Vincypowa News welcomes a response from the Office of the Prime Minister and the Ministry of Finance on the risks outlined here, and on any consultations held with international partners regarding the proposed programme. Any response will be published in full.
Vincypowa NewsPower to the People