Parker calls UWI law classes at ABLP headquarters “political profiteering”

By Azara Lavia
Azaralavia.antiguaobserver.com
United Progressive Party (UPP) Senator Malaka Parker has accused the governing Antigua and Barbuda Labour Party (ABLP) of “political profiteering” over the use of its headquarters for University of the West Indies (UWI) law classes, questioning both the financial arrangements and the decision to hold classes at a political party facility.
Parker alleged that the governing party is benefiting financially from an arrangement she believes could have been avoided. Her claim has not been independently established.
Her comments follow Prime Minister Gaston Browne’s announcement on Saturday, 3 October, that the University of the West Indies (UWI) law programme is expected to return to the Five Islands Campus next semester.
According to Browne, law classes are currently being accommodated at People’s Place, the ABLP’s headquarters, because of limited classroom space at the university. He has maintained that the temporary arrangement allows the newly introduced programme to proceed.
However, speaking exclusively to Observer Media, Parker challenged the suggestion that the governing party had stepped in to rescue the programme.
She argued that inadequate government planning had created the accommodation problem in the first place.
Parker maintained that the same administration responsible for introducing the programme without sufficient preparation is now presenting its political headquarters as the solution, while the ABLP is allegedly benefiting financially.
“We all know that it is not generosity. We all know that what is happening here is not patriotism. It is political profiteering.”
The senator said her concerns extend beyond whether the party is receiving rental payments.
She argued that accommodating university students at a political party headquarters raises ethical questions, regardless of the financial terms.
“And I maintain that even if the building were offered for free, the ethical and other substantial considerations make it a no-go from the beginning. Just should not happen.”
Parker’s claim that the ABLP is receiving financial benefits from the arrangement has not been independently established.
She also rejected the suggestion that People’s Place was the only practical option available to prevent disruption to the law programme.
“Because the choice was never the people’s place, or the collapse of the law programme. Could never be.”
Parker said the government could have provided politically neutral accommodation. UWI could also have rented commercial premises or installed modular classrooms.
She questioned why those options had not been explored during the three-month summer break before classes began.
According to the senator, that period provided an opportunity to consider alternatives and make suitable arrangements for students.
Parker also identified temporary online instruction as another possible solution.
She pointed to UWI’s experience delivering courses remotely during the COVID-19 pandemic and the availability of online law programmes internationally.
“The truth is, UWI itself offered online programmes during COVID. You know, they did that. Thousands of students are getting their LLB online the world over.”
She argued that remote teaching could have been used temporarily while the university arranged suitable classroom accommodation.
Parker questioned the necessity of using People’s Place for a single semester, particularly now that the programme is expected to return to the Five Islands Campus.
“And we’re saying that that could have been a temporary situation here. And if, I mean, the insult to the injury is that if this is only for a semester, and it’s going to be returning to UWI next semester, then what is the point? Why do it to begin with?
The senator maintained that those questioning the venue are not seeking to deny students the opportunity to pursue legal education.
Instead, she argued that the concerns centre on whether the university and government adequately considered other accommodation options.
Parker also questioned the planning behind the introduction of the law programme.
She suggested that the Prime Minister’s announcement in April was politically motivated rather than guided by the university’s academic planning.
“And I dare say that it was an election gimmick, a pronouncement made by this Prime Minister in April of this very year.”
Parker questioned whether the university had been properly consulted before the announcement.
She also raised concerns about whether sufficient consideration had been given to UWI’s resources.
“And I dare say it was done so, in my estimation, without any consultation with the university, without any regard for the university’s resources, its limitations, or its own plans and schedule.”
She characterised the introduction of the programme as a hurried decision, suggesting that UWI had been left to accommodate a political commitment made by the government.
Beyond the accommodation issue, Parker also raised concerns about the university’s independence.
She questioned why explanations about the arrangement continue to come primarily from Prime Minister Browne rather than UWI officials.
According to Parker, the public has largely been receiving information about the lease, classroom accommodation and the programme’s future through the Prime Minister’s radio programme.
She argued that UWI should independently explain decisions affecting its operations.
Parker also questioned why Browne had not addressed the controversy in a setting where journalists could ask questions.
“He has not sat down in a room filled with journalists where questions can be asked and he provides the answers we need.”
She said several important questions remain unanswered.
These include who authorised the arrangement, how much rent is being paid and what alternative accommodation was considered.
“I mean, the people are asking legitimate questions here. Who approved this arrangement? What is the rent? Something as basic as that we still don’t know.”
Parker argued that the university’s handling of those questions raises concerns about possible political interference.
She insisted that UWI has a responsibility to speak for itself and account publicly for decisions affecting its students and operations.
“And we maintain, I maintain that UWI has an obligation and must answer for itself.”
The senator maintained that the Prime Minister’s continued involvement in explaining the arrangement reinforces her concerns about the university’s independence.
Browne has defended the temporary use of People’s Place as a response to the shortage of suitable classroom space at UWI Five Islands Campus.
He has indicated that the law programme is expected to return to the university next semester.
However, Parker maintains that the planned move does not address her wider concerns about the original decision, the alternatives available and the financial and ethical implications of using political party premises for university teaching.