Regional pollster and political analyst Peter Wickham says Barbados Prime Minister Mia Mottley is well placed to retain office after calling a snap general election, though low voter turnout could pose a challenge.
Ms Mottley announced on Saturday that elections will be held on 11 February, a year ahead of the end of her five-year term. It is the second early poll she has called.
Mr Wickham said the timing was not unexpected, noting there had been speculation for months that an election would be called early in the year.
He said the prevailing view in Barbados is that Ms Mottley will win another term, with little sense that the governing Barbados Labour Party is at risk of defeat.
However, he warned that voter apathy may be the main issue, pointing to low turnout at the last general election.
“The key concern is participation,” Mr Wickham said, adding that motivating voters to go to the polls would be the prime minister’s biggest challenge.
He suggested the early election was called because the government believes it has a political advantage, as the opposition has struggled to gain traction and unity.
Mr Wickham said the expectation remains that Ms Mottley will secure victory, with attention likely to focus on the size of her majority rather than the outcome itself.
Advertise with the mоѕt vіѕіtеd nеwѕ ѕіtе іn Antigua!
We offer fully customizable and flexible digital marketing packages.
Contact us at [email protected]
You face is disgusting knowing you are married to a man, you must not speak to normal people intellect.
What most people do not know is that Barbados was one of the Caribbean islands that the US has pressured to accept refugees. This must be one of the reasons why the Barbados Prime Minister is seeking a fresh mandate. Clearly she cannot break this agreement to the Barbados citizenry and would rather seek a fresh mandate before breaking the news. Some people think that had Barbados not agreed to accept refugees, they could also lose their US Embassy, perhaps to Trinidad and Tobago. Other countries pressured to take refugees are Belize, Antigua & Barbuda, Dominica, St. Lucia, St.Kitts and Nevis and Guyana. The US has over 7500 refugees that they are trying to remove and resettle in 2026 and many might be headed to the Caribbean. Countries refusing to cooperate with the US and accept their refugees are exposed to indirect sanctions concluding visa restrictions as well as restrictions to their international corresponding banking acumen. Our leaders are trying to cope with difficult decisions of economic pragmatism and practical submission. How they leverage the good out of the present chaos and return to normal programming is gonna be closely watched.
@Audley.
I see you have learned the “slight of tongue” technique from GB, and in the same breath trying to sound diplomatic in your approach.
I keep telling you this fellow, many people out here ain’t falling for that “slick speech” anymore.
You talk as if these are US citizens in your wording ” US refugees”. Very slick indeed.
Talk straight when you talk, because your disingenuousness is vomiting.
It’s a very bias assessment at best from your wording, and it does not give a clear view of the real scope of where we are in terms of the US and the Caribbean relationship.
These are refugees/illegal entries to the US, they are not US citizens..so saying that the US ” is trying to force” their refugees on Carribean islands in terribly disingenuous.
Many of these same “refugees” are from the Caribbean, many. Do you know Jamaica gets a deportee plane from the US and in some cases from the UK every other month or so?
The man is cleaning up his immigration system and trying to bring down the US national debt, but all you see, is that the Trump administration hates black people and are trying to bully them.
Do you know that over ten European nations are tightening up the immigration policies as well, and are turning back millions from their boarders? This is after they have learnt that their system cannot accommodate this mass influx of people, it’s too big a burden.
Are they also racist? You beat and you beat on the US, but not one word is spoke of China or many other countries that has was stricker human rights violations than the US.
You fail to look at the political Agenda the man has put forth, and national debt is his biggest one. I don’t like the man personally, but I wish Antigua would follow his measures on US immigration system as well.
Stop putting out these bias comments to try and cast GB in a good light.
@audley.
Since you are so intelligent, because it seems you don’t know what’s going on here in the relationship of Antigua and the US government.
GB is willing to make “quid pro quo” deals with China, but are not willing to make any deals with the US, why is that? And from a negotiating standpoint, what do Antigua has to trade in exchange of America’s aide,nothing?
But you want a embassy in Antigua and everyone to have the opportunity to enter the US to make their babies and further burden the US debt. So tell me from a negotiating standpoint, what’s fair and feasible for the US, since GB wants all these US perks to continue?
Don’t be one sided dude..look at it from all angles. It’s called ” politics” so be a smart politician, and GB is no such thing.
Terrible negotiating skills..quite lazy of you ask me.
GB is like some of these females these days..they want you to take them to dinner, pay their bills, get their nails and hair done, and bring nothing to the table.
All because they think they are pretty and in Antigua’s case, it’s pretty 365 beaches. Well Trump said he came to stop giving out freebies, those same freebies GB claimed that many Antiguan’s are on food stamps.
So which one is it. GB argument or Trump’s?
@Audley Phillip well said you hit the nail on the head.
Comments are closed.