Corruption, public money and the Langley Park Playing Field

By *Guevara Leacock

On A View from the Outside this week, we turn our attention to corruption. More specifically, we turn our attention to what appears to be evidence of corruption within state bodies in St. Vincent and the Grenadines (SVG) and to the larger questions that follow from that: the use of public money, the integrity of public institutions, and the public’s right to know whether state resources are being used for the people, or for political advantage.

The New Democratic Party, which now holds the reins of government in SVG, campaigned for over 20 years on the promise that, if elected, it would conduct forensic audits into the economic affairs of the country. That promise was made because, for years, the NDP alleged that corruption was widespread in SVG, and that the previous administration was either complicit in it, blind to it, or unwilling to confront it. Those allegations were serious then, and they are serious now. The NDP is no longer in opposition; it is in government and now has the authority, the responsibility, and the public mandate to act to stamp out corruption in SVG.

At the end of April 2026, it was reported in the local media that the National Lotteries Authority had allegedly approved a payment of EC$250,000 for work on the Langley Park Playing Field just days before the Nov. 27 general election. According to the reports, a senior member of the former ULP administration “approved” a payment to a local contractor for works connected to the playing field. The payment was reportedly made eight days before the election, and the contractor is said to have visited a local bank the following day and cashed the cheque, receiving 2,500 EC$100 bills in raw cash. The most troubling part of the news reports is that representatives of the new board of the National Lotteries Authority later visited the site and allegedly found that no additional work had been done.

Now let us be clear, allegations are just that: allegations. They are not convictions. They are not, by themselves, proof of actual wrongdoing. A report in the media is not the same thing as a finding by a court, a forensic auditor, an anti-corruption body, or a properly constituted investigative authority. But when public money is involved, especially a sum as large as EC$250,000 in an economy where ordinary people are struggling, the public is entitled to ask serious questions, and the public is entitled to receive serious answers.

Who authorised this payment? On what basis was it approved? Was there a contract? Was there a tendering process? Was there a bill of quantities? Was there a proper assessment of the work to be done? Was there any verification before payment? Who inspected the site before the money was released? Who certified that the work was necessary? And if no work was done, as is alleged, where is the money now?

Vincentians, you deserve answers to these questions. Do not allow this serious allegation to be swept under the carpet, as we say locally. Do not allow it to become a nine days’ talk. Do not allow the matter to flare up today, fade tomorrow, and disappear next week. We on A View from the Outside are calling for a forensic audit into the financial affairs of the National Lotteries Authority. The people need to know what happened to the EC$250,000 of public money that was allegedly paid out in relation to the Langley Park Playing Field. We have not forgotten.

The details reported are deeply concerning. The document requesting the EC$250,000 is said to have been undated. It apparently referred to proposed works such as cutting trees, removing stumps, grading the land, cutting foundation, casting concrete and building a toilet structure. According to the report, the details were thin, the scope of work appears vague and the costing appears unclear. The documentary trail appears weak and for a quarter of a million dollars of public money, that is simply not good enough.

Public procurement must not operate on vague promises, informal conversations, political convenience or the signature of a powerful person such as a government minister. Public procurement must operate on documentation, transparency, accountability, value for money, and proper oversight. If money is being paid for work, the public must be able to see what work was agreed, what work was done, who did the work, who approved the payment and who verified completion. These are fundamental features of accountable government, especially when it relates to public finances.

The payment was reportedly approved just days before a general election so the timing matters.  In a democracy, the period immediately before an election is especially sensitive. Public resources must never be used in a way that blurs the line between government and party politics. A government is not a campaign machine. A statutory body is not a political purse and public money is not campaign money. The National Lotteries Authority exists to serve public purposes, including the development of sport, culture, and community life in SVG. Its resources are not to be used for partisan convenience.

The Langley Park Playing Field is not just a patch of land. It is supposed to be an area of recreation for persons within that community. It should be a symbol of community spirit and cohesion. It should provide an opportunity for young people in that area to engage in sport and other social activities that help them avoid crime, violence, idleness and hopelessness; problems which continue to plague too many young people in our country.

The development of the Langley Park Playing Field has been the subject of political promises for years. It was constantly raised during election campaigns and in Parliament by the previous ULP administration. There were even claims of two groundbreaking ceremonies for the same facility. That history matters because it shows how promises of development can become political theatre when they are not followed by delivery. Promises without delivery can themselves become part of a culture of corruption, especially where public money is paid out but the promised development does not materialise as in case of the Langley Park Playing Field.

That is why a forensic audit is needed. Not a casual internal review, a quiet file check or a political press conference. A forensic audit. A serious, independent examination of the financial records, approval processes, supporting documents, bank transactions, contractor arrangements, board minutes, ministerial involvement, and any related payments. If this happened once, the public is entitled to know whether it happened before. If this was part of a wider pattern, the public is entitled to know the full extent of that pattern.

The corruption question is therefore wider than one cheque, one contractor, or one playing field. Corruption is not only the brown envelope passed in a dark corner. Corruption can also be the casual misuse of public office. It can be the weakening of procedure. It can be the conversion of public institutions into tools of political survival. It can be the use of state money to create the appearance of action when elections are near. It can be the failure to demand receipts, contracts, inspections, and accountability. It can be a system in which public money moves quickly, quietly and conveniently, but public benefit is nowhere to be seen.

For ordinary Vincentians, this is not abstract. EC$250,000 is not a small sum. That money could support community facilities. It could support sports programmes. It could support schools. It could help small contractors who actually complete work. It could assist genuine development in rural communities. It could help build the kind of facilities that keep young people engaged, active, disciplined, and hopeful.

When public money is mishandled, the loss is not only financial. It damages trust. It tells citizens that the rules are different depending on who you know. It discourages honest public servants from doing their work diligently. It weakens confidence in government. It creates cynicism among young people, who begin to believe that politics is not about them, their future, or their development, but about politicians, parties, friends, favours, and self-interest.

So what should happen now with this report concerning the National Lotteries Authority?

First, there must be a proper investigation. Not rumours. Not gossip. Not political shouting. Not selective outrage. The NDP must fulfil its election promise of conducting forensic audits. Start with the National Lotteries Authority. Now is not the time for soft leadership. The kinder, gentler society ship has sailed when it comes to corruption. There is nothing kind and gentle about corruption, and there is nothing kind and gentle about uprooting corruption and holding corrupt people accountable.

Second, there must be institutional reform. SVG cannot depend on changes of government to discover what happened inside public bodies. Accountability must be built into the system. Statutory bodies that handle public money should have strong procurement rules, independent audits, transparent reporting, and clear limits on ministerial interference. Public money should not move simply because someone powerful signs a document. Maybe it is also time to consider whether SVG needs a Serious Fraud Office or a specialised anti-corruption investigative body with the expertise, independence and authority to follow the money wherever it goes.

Third, we need a political culture that treats public office as a trust. Ministers are not owners of public funds. Boards are not decorative bodies. Contractors are not entitled to public money without proper work and Vincentians are not beggars waiting for favours. In a democratic society, the people are the principals and public officials are the agents. The money belongs to Vincentians. The land belongs to Vincentians. The institutions belong to Vincentians.

The real test of democracy is not what politicians promise when they want votes. The real test is what they do with power when they have access to the public purse. If EC$250,000 can be approved for a playing field, cashed in hundred-dollar bills, and no work is visible on the ground, then the people of SVG have every right to ask who benefited, who authorised it, and who will be held accountable?

Vincentians want to know the answers. Vincentians deserve to know the answers. Give us the forensic audits we were promised. Public money belongs to the people, and the people have a right to know how it was spent.

*Guevara Leacock is a barrister at law of Lincoln’s Inn in England and an attorney at law in St. Vincent and the Grenadines. He has a keen interest in history and politics and is a social commentator.

The opinions presented in this content belong to the author and may not necessarily reflect the perspectives or editorial stance of iWitness News. Opinion pieces can be submitted to [email protected].