DLP raises red flag over free movement policy

The Democratic Labour Party (DLP) is questioning the legality and timing of the government’s decision to allow CARICOM nationals from Belize, Dominica and St Vincent and the Grenadines to live and work freely in Barbados from October 1, 2025, under a reciprocal arrangement.

Opposition Leader Ralph Thorne KC described the announcement as “tainted with illegality,” arguing that it did not receive prior approval from Parliament.

At a press conference held on Saturday, he reaffirmed the DLP’s support for regional integration and the free movement of labour, but insisted such policies should be grounded in law.

“Even a prime minister who believes she is all-powerful is still subject to the rule of law,” he told reporters. “This announcement exceeds her legal powers. It is an arbitrary exercise of authority, and only parliament can make it lawful.”

The Opposition Leader noted that the relevant immigration and citizenship bills remain before a Joint Select Committee on Governance, and until these legislations are approved, any action by state agencies would lack a legal foundation.

“This initiative cannot be properly implemented without legislation,” he stated. “We, therefore, caution government departments, including Immigration, the Barbados Revenue Authority and the Electoral and Boundaries Commission, not to act on what has no legal basis.”

Also speaking at the briefing was former Minister of Foreign Affairs, Senator Maxine McClean, who underscored the importance of legal and institutional frameworks in achieving meaningful regional integration.

Drawing on her years of regional experience, McClean argued that strong political statements must be backed by legislative action.

“It is essential that we translate the ideals of regionalism into domestic law and implementation,” she said. “Free movement cannot occur at the whims and fancies of politics or without the necessary legal structures.”

McClean also raised concerns about the impact of Citizenship by Investment Programmes (CBIs) in the region, using Dominica as an example. She noted the disparity between the country’s population and the number of passports granted under its CBI programme between 2018 and 2024.

“We need to ask a simple but critical question,” she said. “Are these individuals, who have become citizens through investment programmes, included under this new arrangement for free movement? If so, what rights and privileges do they carry when entering Barbados?”

She said her comments were not rooted in hostility or fear of CARICOM nationals but in the need to ensure that legal processes are respected and that the implications of such policies are fully understood.

Attorney-at-law and DLP candidate for Christ Church South, Corey Greenidge, provided a legal analysis of the proposed immigration and citizenship bills.

He pointed to what he believes are discrepancies between the draft legislation and public statements by Prime Minister Mia Mottley.

Greenidge said that while the DLP welcomed efforts to bolster the labour force, the country’s current limitations in areas such as housing, healthcare and employment must be addressed before welcoming additional workers.

He also questioned the decision to reduce the qualifying period for citizenship to six months, suggesting it could have implications for voter eligibility.

“When you connect the dots, it raises questions,” he said. “Once citizenship is granted after six months, individuals could become eligible to vote. We must ask whether this policy, at this time, is being driven by national interest or political expediency.”

Opposition Leader Thorne reiterated that the DLP’s position was not anti-regional but pro-law.

“We are governed by a constitution, not by decree,” he said. “Regionalism must advance through the rule of law, not political shortcuts.”

The DLP is encouraging Barbadians to follow the work of the Joint Select Committee closely and to participate in the public consultation process. Thorne added that if any action taken under the new initiative violates the law, the party would consider seeking judicial review. (DT)