Donald Trump announced he will be seeking $1bn (£730m) in damages from Harvard University in his administration’s ongoing feud with the institution.
The news comes after the New York Times reported that the US president’s administration had to backtrack from its demand for a $200m payment in negotiations with the university.
Trump cited the story in a Truth Social post late on Monday, blaming Harvard for “feeding a lot of nonsense” to the New York Times.
Trump officials have accused Harvard of not doing enough to tackle antisemitism during pro-Palestinian protests. Harvard has rejected the accusation.
Harvard has been a central target in the White House’s campaign to stamp out what it calls “woke” and “radical left” ideologies on American campuses.
In April last year, Trump revoked around $2bn in research grants to Harvard and froze federal funding.
The university sued the Trump administration over the move, saying no government “should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue”.
A US federal court later overturned the billions in funding cuts, ruling the government had violated university’s free speech rights.
The White House vowed to immediately challenge the “egregious decision”, saying Harvard remains “ineligible for grants in the future”.
Before Monday’s announcement, the government had been in discussions with Harvard over a potential deal to unfreeze federal funding.
“We are now seeking One Billion Dollars in damages, and want nothing further to do, into the future, with Harvard University,” Trump wrote on Monday.
He accused Harvard of “serious and heinous illegalities”, but did not clarify how he believed it had broken the law.
Trump has previously threatened to revoke Harvard’s tax-exempt status and take control of the university’s patents stemming from federally funded research.
Three other Ivy League universities, Columbia, Penn and Brown, struck deals with Trump to preserve funding that was at risk due to similar claims by the administration, rather than go to court. (BBC News)
Efforts undertaken on Sunday to salvage the vessel MV Christina Debora on Cobblers Reef, in St Philip, were halted due to safety concerns for personnel engaged in the recovery.
Following real-time aerial footage captured by the Barbados Defence Force’s (BDF) Drone Unit, a team from the Barbados Coast Guard ship Trident and a smaller Coast Guard vessel made attempts to conduct an onboard assessment to determine the most efficient and effective method to connect the MV Christina Debora to the Barbados Port Inc.’s tug boat, Hercules. However, these efforts were hampered by unfavourable sea conditions.
Based on the weather forecast for the upcoming week, a BDF official with the task force indicated that the swell of waves affecting the coast would prohibit vessel access for the next few days.
Director of the Coastal Zone Management Unit, Dr Leo Brewster, said the longer the vessel stayed in position on the reef, the greater the damage would be to the immediate ecosystem, especially with the vessel rocking.
Brewster, however, noted that the safety concerns for personnel deployed to board the vessel must take precedence.
It was agreed by on-site officials from the Government-led inter-agency task force that until wave and wind conditions reduced and changed direction, salvage efforts for the vessel would best be made between Friday and Sunday.
Until the salvage efforts resume, the BDF will continue daily aerial surveillance.
Government will require about $598.6 million to pay debt for the December 2025 to March 31, 2026 period.
With the Ministry of Finance projecting that the public debt stock will be around $15.04 billion at the end of March, total debt payments for the full 2025-2026 fiscal year are now an estimated $2.5 billion.
This information is detailed in the January 27 Pre-Election Economic And Fiscal Update Report published by the Ministry of Finance.
“Approximately $598.6 million will be required to service existing debt obligations for the period December 2025 to March 2026, including $263.3 million for interest expense, $304 million for amortisation, $3 million for loan expenses and $28.2 million for Sinking Fund contributions,” the report stated.
Budgeted amount
“This is approximately $110.3 million less than the budgeted amount for the period and is attributable primarily to the liability management operation conducted in June 2025, which involved the repurchase of approximately US$340.4 million of the Government’s 2029 6.5 per cent Note and the issuance of a new US$500 million 2035 eight per cent Note.
“Expenditure was therefore front-loaded in the first half of the financial year. The interest on the new US$500 million eight per cent Note, which will commence in December, will be somewhat mitigated by the reduced payment on the Government’s 2029 6.5 per cent Note due in March 2026.”
Repurchase
The ministry said the total revised debt expenditure of $2.5 billion was about $682.9 million more than the amount approved in the Estimates, attributing the increase primarily to “the repurchase of the Government’s 2029 6.5 per cent Eurobond and to a partial prepayment of the International Monetary Fund External Fund Facility obligations, executed as a liability management operation in June 2025”.
With the public debt stock expected to be $15.04 billion at the end of the current financial year on March 31, the Ministry of Finance said this was comprised of domestic debt ($8.91 billion), external debt ($5.87 million), external guaranteed debt ($67 million) and Central Government arrears ($185.5 million).
Regarding state-owned enterprises (SOEs), the report noted that “at the end of September 2025, total SOEs arrears contracted to $77 million following a peak of $117.8 million in July 2022, which was the direct result of tax arrears accumulated by the Barbados National Oil Company Ltd and accrued NIS (National Insurance) arrears related to outstanding severance and NIS contributions by other SOEs”.
On average, the stock of SOE arrears “is expected to decline by at least $2.4 million per quarter during fiscal year 2025/26”. (SC)
Two economists say the Barbados Labour Party’s (BLP) manifesto has critical unanswered questions about how its economic ambitions will be financed and executed.
Head of the Sir Arthur Lewis Institute of Social and Economic Studies at the University of the West Indies, Cave Hill, Professor Don Marshall, argues that the just-launched manifesto does not present a credible industrial policy capable of delivering the kind of structural economic transformation Barbados requires.
Professor Troy Lorde, dean of the Faculty of Social Sciences at Cave Hill, who has also reviewed the document, has raised related concerns about the document’s execution framework and fiscal coherence.
At the manifesto launch last Saturday night in Golden Square Freedom Park, The City, BLP leader, Prime Minister Mia Amor Mottley, announced proposals that included Barbadians earning less than $50 000 a year no longer having to pay income tax; a cost of living cash credit of $100 a month to pensioners, those on welfare and others receiving the special needs grant; a $750 reverse tax credit for those earning between $25 000 and $35 000, while those earning up to $25 000 a year getting $1 700, up from $1 300.
A Barbados Republic Child Wealth Fund is also to be set up, giving a one-time birthright investment of $5 000 to every child born on or after November 30, 2021.
Flyovers on the highway, an increase in car loan limits for public servants and housing benefits, hiring more police officers and the expansion of the Queen Elizabeth Hospital with a connecting bridge to a nearby site, are also among the manifesto promises.
The Prime Minister said the proposals would cost just over $142.2 million a year, with the highest cost going to the cost of living cash credit and returns to the pensioners.
Marshall said while the manifesto outlines an expanded social agenda and a range of relief measures, it remains rooted in policy assumptions that have historically failed to produce economic diversification or quality employment.
“I have had several discussions and debates over the years about the salience of an industrial policy,” he told the DAILY NATION.
“Recent dynamics and events have allowed for greater consensus among those of us who teach, write and publish on these matters for a living. The neoliberal grip on the policy imagination of our planners suffocated the possibility of transformation beyond the goal of financial sector enhancement, and the populist accommodation with neoliberalism has not led to quality jobs, nor a real diversification of the Barbados economy.”
He argued that the manifesto trades heavily in social protection while failing to interrogate the underlying commercial structure of the economy.
“We are presented a suite of relief measures and promises of an uplift of social sector protectionism – health, education and housing – but there is no analysis of the commercial dealing bias of the economy that leaves the country bedraggled with heavy imports in fuel, food and medicine. That underlying structure is what continues to drive high costs and vulnerability.”
Marshall said the document does not articulate a clear conception of the developmental state required to drive value-added production and sectoral integration.
“No conception of the enabling developmental state is presented,” he said. “Instead, the manifesto proceeds as if the prevailing conservative enterprise culture is not itself a challenge to overcome, when in fact that culture is one of the binding constraints on transformation.”
He also questioned how sectors identified for growth will be meaningfully integrated into the wider economy.
“Mention is made about encouraging growth in the creative sector, but how is this to be integrated into a coherent strategy of nurturing forward and backward linkages to tourism, international business and food security?” the professor asked. “What is the plan, the statecraft and the budgetary action plans to buttress the same? These are the questions that matter if transformation is to be more than rhetoric.”
Lorde said the BLP manifesto is structured less as a traditional campaign document and more as a governing narrative that assumes continuity in office and rewards for administrative competence.
He noted that it frames governance, life outcomes and state capacity as a continuum, signalling a shift from crisis stabilisation to execution. However, he said this framing heightens the need for fiscal clarity.
“The manifesto is asking voters to see the BLP less as a party of new promises and more as the manager of a system – institutions, delivery and resilience,” Lorde said. “The difficulty with that approach is that legitimacy through competence depends on showing how the entire programme fits within a binding fiscal logic.”
While acknowledging that the BLP explicitly cost its Making Life More Affordable package, the economist said this transparency was not extended across the rest of the programme.
“It is relatively easy to cost one flagship social package. What is much harder, and what is missing here, is a clear presentation of the mediumterm budget constraint – how health expansion, policing infrastructure, water systems, digital government and industrial zones are all to be funded together, and what trade-offs are being made.”
Lorde said many of the manifesto’s major initiatives are presented as discrete projects rather than as part of an integrated expenditure framework.
“Without that integration, voters are left to infer whether these commitments will be financed through higher charges, reduced service quality elsewhere or the reintroduction of fiscal stress by other means.”
He also cautioned that the manifesto’s industrial ambitions, including reindustrialisation and proposed GIGA zones, rely on expansive language without sufficient operational detail.
“The language is big and appealing, but the manifesto does not force itself into the level of specificity that makes industrial policy believable – particularly in a small, open economy with well-known coordination constraints.”
On crime, Lorde said the manifesto’s blend of prevention, enforcement and correctional reform was coherent in intent but weak on institutional mechanics.
“What ultimately changes lived reality is throughput. Case files, forensic turnaround times, court scheduling culture, remand management – these are the things that translate activity into deterrence and they are largely absent from the discussion,” he stated. (CLM)
Retail prices for gasoline, diesel, kerosene and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) were reduced effective midnight, Sunday, February 1.
Gasoline decreased by 11 cents and is now selling at $3.77 per litre, while diesel fell by 16 cents to $3.25 per litre. Kerosene also recorded a five-cent reduction and is retailing at $1.43 per litre.
LPG prices were adjusted as follows: the 100 lb cylinder is $161.47, the 25 lb cylinder $45.47, the 22 lb cylinder $40.18 and the 20 lb cylinder $36.52.
The next price adjustment is scheduled for Sunday, March 1, 2026. (BGIS)
In what was described as a case of grooming, Rawlston Carrington was made to pay compensation to the under-aged girl with whom he had sex 17 years ago.
This Content Is Only For Subscribers
Please subscribe to unlock this content. Enter your email to get access.
Carrington, then 28, now 44, of Montrose, Christ Church, had pleaded guilty, in the No 4 Supreme Court, to having sexual intercourse with a girl who had attained the age of 14 but not 16, between January 5 and August 31, 2009.
He was represented by attorney Shadia Simpson, while State Counsel Paul Prescod appeared for the prosecution.
Last Friday, Justice Laurie-Ann Smith-Bovell said that unless there were exceptional circumstances, cases of sexual offences were usually “visited with custodial sentences”.
She added that after considering the facts and the evidence, she determined that the threshold for a custodial sentence had been crossed.
The judge said she determined that seven years was the appropriate starting point for the sentence.
She reduced the starting point by one year for the mitigating features in the case and deducted one third for the guilty plea. Carrington spent no time on remand.
Justice Smith-Bovell then imposed compensation of $15 000 of which Carrington was ordered to pay $2 500 forthwith.
He must pay a further $2 500 by February 27, and the remaining $10 000 by November 13. If he fails to pay the compensation he will spend one year, 285 days in jail.
She further sentenced him to one year, 285 days in jail but suspended it for two years.
The court had heard the girl, who is hearing impaired, and Carrington, a painter, met at a friend’s house and he placed his number in her phone. He tried to hug her but she refused.
She texted him the next day and he texted, calling her beautiful and telling her he loved her.
She did not respond but when he asked to see her, she told him her mother was at home. Carrington asked her to text him when her mother left and when she did so, he came to the house and she allowed him in. He kissed her before she pushed him away.
The two continued texting each other but her sister saw the texts and informed their mother, who got angry and ordered her daughter to have nothing to do with Carrington.
Then during the first week of 2009, she saw him at Sheraton and he started texting her, saying he loved her.
One day while her mother was out, he visited the house and initiated sex. The girl said they had sex a number of times.
Her mother eventually discovered the trysts after reading her diary and took her to the police station.
Carrington subsequently told police the girl had told him she was 16, going on 17 years.
He said one day her sister called his cellphone, wanting to know who it was, and her mother also called and was vexed at first, but after they spoke, he told her he would stop talking to the girl.
When the girl saw him some time later, she started texting him about being together.
He said he did not want to, but in an attempt to make her stop, he did.
He added the girl threatened to “**** up” him if she could not get him. (HLE)
Democratic Labour Party (DLP) candidate for St Philip South Neil Marshall, plans to officially designate Six Roads as a town if elected.
Speaking on Saturday night during a party meeting in Rices, St Philip, Marshall highlighted traffic congestion and the lack of space for small entrepreneurs as key challenges in Six Roads.
He announced that under a DLP Government, the city centre in Six Roads would be designated as a town and benefit from the Special Development Act, aimed at supporting small businesses.
“We welcome all of the investment that comes to Six Roads, but St Philip belongs to us. And we, as people from St Philip, must have a stake in Six Roads,” he said.
“We will no longer be relegated to scotching on at the side by the Welfare Office, or to be trespassing at the entrance and exit of Emerald City car park. Our entrepreneurs in Six Roads need a space as well. And we have determined that that space needs to be at the front and centre of Six Roads, as opposed to being hidden away somewhere in the back.”
The DLP candidate also spoke about the condition of roads and infrastructure in other traditional villages, including Ruby Park and parts of Diamond Valley.
“Ruby Park needs some rehabilitation. It’s now over 50 years old, but places in Diamond Valley still need developing. All of our traditional districts need serious work done. And it has been a failure of the representative for this constituency to address many of those issues, particularly where the large tenantries in Barbados, where persons have a statutory right now to purchase their properties. We have Six Roads as a city centre, a town.”
Marshall also warned voters about what he described as a “complete failure of governance” under the current Barbados Labour Party (BLP) administration, citing high cost of living and rising utility bills.
“Families now have to juggle what I call impossible choices. Do you buy food or do you pay the electric bill? Water or rent? Do you pay the mortgage or do you put gas in the car?” he asked.
A red wave surged through Golden Square Freedom Park on Saturday night as members and supporters of the Barbados Labour Party (BLP) gathered, red and ready, for the launch of their manifesto.
Long before the scheduled 7 p.m. start, the Bees had already begun to swarm the historic and sacred space where Barbados’ fight for freedom first took root under Clement Payne – signalling that this was no ordinary political meeting, but a declaration of momentum, memory, and mission.
As the buzz of anticipation grew louder, it suddenly fell into reverent silence. Heads bowed and eyes closed as the Reverend Wayne Kirton of the St John the Baptist and Good Shepherd Church led the gathering in prayer – for the country, the candidates, and for the Queen Bee herself, Prime Minister Mia Amor Mottley. The tone shifted from celebration to purpose. Then, it was down to business.
Opening the batting, St Thomas candidate Gregory Nicholls welcomed the crowd and urged them to turn the pages of the Red Report – more than 130 pages outlining what the BLP had delivered over the past seven years. He reminded supporters that it was this red administration that pulled Barbados back from the brink of chaos and set it firmly on a path forward.
There was, it appeared, much to brag about – and brag the Bees did, one after the other.
Christ Church South candidate Dr Shantal Munro-Knight highlighted Barbados’ hosting of what she described as the biggest CARIFESTA ever, which closely followed Crop Over, then the Food and Rum Festival, pointing to their impact on the creative economy. Yet, when she turned to future plans for a National Performing Arts School of Excellence, the crowd’s enthusiasm seemed to dip. She had to plead with them to “clap for dat”, a telling moment in a night where noise and music often overshadowed speakers.
St Philip West candidate Kay McConney urged supporters to “hug up the manifesto, love it up,” insisting it laid out exactly where the BLP intends to take Barbados. Toni Moore, candidate for St George North, directed the crowd to Page 19 of the manifesto under the heading Jobs, Jobs, Jobs, promising a better deal for workers.
Outside of the Prime Minister, however, the man of the night seemed to be Michael Lashley, now the BLP candidate for The City of Bridgetown after crossing from the Democratic Labour Party.
Lashley received deafening screams – especially when he opened with, “Good night to my family”.
He confidently declared that his candidacy meant victory for The City and ultimately the party. The reaction was striking, considering that just one election ago he was on the opposite side, loudly condemning the BLP.
Lashley delivered one of the night’s sharpest jabs, aimed at DLP candidate James Paul.
“I always thought James Paul was stupid, but after the other night when he told people to vote for the BLP, I must now say he has a lot of sense.”
The line landed perfectly. Much of the night’s humour revolved around “James Paul jokes”, with multiple speakers urging the crowd to follow Paul’s “advice” and vote BLP – a reference to Paul’s recent slip of the tongue at a DLP event where he mistakenly told supporters to vote for the BLP. Lashley’s speech was punctuated throughout, by chants of “Talk yuh talk, Michael!”
The only other person who jammed lower than that was Kerrie Symmonds, who had the best interaction with the crowd. He told them at one time, that David Estwick of the DLP, said he was coming to eat the “whole Barbados Labour Party”. But according to Symmonds, “If he did that he would create history, because he would be the first man to have more brains in his belly than in his head.” The crowd loved the low blow. Beyond the platform, the crowd itself told its own story. Tony, seated in a wheelchair with crutches resting across his lap, said nothing could have kept him away. “I drink some of the Kool-Aid,” he laughed. “So I had to come.”
Rhonda Rogers, a naturalised Barbadian wearing red, said she supported the BLP because she viewed it as the party most welcoming to non-nationals – she is a naturalised Barbadian and will be voting on February 11.
Sandra Brodghan, originally from Jamaica, said she attended the meeting because Mia Mottley was her hero – and the hero of many of her friends back in Jamaica Deputy Prime Minister Santia Bradshaw, candidate for St Michael South East, delivered a fiery defence of the party, declaring that neither cancer nor anything else would stop her from standing up for the BLP. She challenged critics who often accused the Prime Minister of being absent from the country, insisting that even when Mottley was overseas, the work for Barbadians never stopped . . . . “Even when she is absent, she is present,” she declared.
Ian Gooding-Edghill, candidate for St Michael West Central, promised improved roads and a new way to travel, while Kirk Humphrey, candidate for St Michael South, received one of the warmest welcomes of the night, warned that the opposition would try to punch holes in the manifesto.
“But what do you expect from a Thorne?” he quipped, drawing hearty laughter – a pointed reference to Opposition Leader Ralph Thorne.
Not everyone in attendance wore red. Antonio, dressed in neutral colours, said he was there simply to listen.
“I not for any party,” he said, adding that he hadn’t yet decided whether he would vote.
Winston echoed similar sentiments, saying he didn’t own a red shirt and didn’t belong to any party, but admitted he was liking what he was hearing from the BLP platform.
Prominent attorney and activist Tricia Watson, attending with her daughters, said she wanted to remain neutral but felt it was important for her children to experience the political atmosphere firsthand. The only thing red on her was her spectacle frames.
Still, the night belonged to Prime Minister Mottley.
Introduced shortly after 10:15 p.m., following her special song, Tek Charge by Lead Pipe and the full slate of candidates behind her, Mottley took the stage as the final speaker – and held it for nearly two hours. With the aid of a PowerPoint presentation, she methodically laid out what a BLP victory would mean for Barbadians.
Her proposals included a cost of living cash credit, an increase in the reverse tax credit for earners between $25 000 and $35 000, the Barbados Republic Child Wealth Fund providing a one-time $5 000 birthright investment for every child born on or after November 30, 2021, and raising the tax-free pension allowance from $50 000 to $75 000.
The detail mattered. The visuals mattered. And by the end of her address, the Bees appeared satisfied – leaving the meeting with their manifestos and having received the honey they had come for.
Even the several vendors around the perimeter of the Park seemed satisfied with business for the night. A few said the night was “good” for them.
The critiques
Still, the night was not without its flaws.
Each candidate had their own musical introduction, and at times the entertainment threatened to overshadow the speakers. It was a noisy affair, with heavy emphasis on music and spectacle. While performances by Casha Dottin and Alix Cage were a welcomed and classy touch, the balance between education and entertainment often tilted towards the latter.
But people clearly loved the music, the speeches and the promises.
All that remains now is the ultimate test: whether that enthusiasm translates into votes.
Roxanne Gibbs is a former Executive Editor of the Nation Publishing Co. Ltd.
Awards for the meeting based on a maximum of four stars for any category:
This report segment places the current political mood alongside the last two General Elections using a like-for-like comparison: vote share among those who actually make a party choice. This is the standard approach used in classic swing analysis, because election results themselves only include people who voted.
The comparison shows that while the Barbados Labour Party’s (BLP) vote share dipped slightly between 2018 and 2022, it remains historically high. In the current poll, among voters who are prepared to choose a party, the BLP’s share is higher than in either of the last two elections, while the Democratic Labour Party’s (DLP) share is lower than at any point since 2018.
Discussion on swing analysis of parties’ voter shares When we compare the current poll with the last General Election using the standard or “classic” swing approach, the movement is clear among voters who are prepared to choose a party.
In the 2022 election, the BLP won just under seven out of every ten valid votes cast. In the current poll, among respondents who name either the BLP or the DLP, just over threequarters now say they would vote for the BLP. This represents an increase of about eight percentage points in the governing party’s share among decided voters, indicating that support for the BLP has consolidated rather than weakened since the last election.
The picture for the DLP moves in the opposite direction. In 2022, it secured just over a quarter of the valid votes cast. In the current poll, its share among decided voters falls to under one in five. This drop of roughly eight percentage points suggests that the Opposition party has lost ground among voters who are ready to make a clear party choice, rather than converting dissatisfaction with the Government into committed support for itself.
Taken together, these two movements produce what pollsters call a two-party swing of about eight points towards the BLP. In simple terms, this means that among people who are already willing to choose between the two main parties, momentum has shifted in favour of the governing party rather than towards the Opposition.
Importantly, this swing does not mean that all voters are becoming more enthusiastic about the BLP. Instead, it shows that dissatisfaction with politics is not translating into a swing to the DLP, but is instead being expressed through uncertainty, silence or a decision not to vote.
The swing therefore reflects a strengthening of the BLP’s position among committed voters, alongside continued difficulty for the DLP in presenting itself as a convincing alternative.
Important cautions when reading the swing figures Firstly, the swing discussed here is based only on voters who are prepared to name a party today. It deliberately excludes people who are undecided, refuse to state a preference or say they will not vote. This means the swing shows relative strength among committed voters, not the views of the entire electorate.
A large number of Barbadians remain uncommitted, and their eventual decisions or decision not to vote could still affect the final outcome. When undecided and nonvoting respondents are included, the story shifts from a swing toward the BLP to a broader pattern of voter disengagement, where dissatisfaction is expressed through uncertainty and abstention, rather than support for the Opposition.
Second, a swing towards the BLP does not automatically imply higher enthusiasm or higher turnout. Many respondents who do not currently support the Opposition are not switching to the BLP; instead, they are expressing frustration by remaining uncertain or disengaged.
If these groups stay home on election day, the results may reflect the choices of a smaller, more motivated segment of the population rather than broad national sentiment.
Third, swing analysis compares like with like, but the context around elections can change. The 2022 election occurred under conditions of low turnout and unusual political circumstances, and the current poll reflects opinions at a particular moment in time. Poll results capture attitudes, not actions, and voter behaviour can still shift during campaigns, especially as parties release manifestos, nominate candidates and increase mobilisation.
Finally, this is a national poll, not a constituency-level study. Even a strong national swing does not translate directly into seat outcomes, which depend on who turns out and where. Local candidate effects, constituencyspecific issues and differential turnout across communities can all alter election results in ways that national swing figures cannot predict.
Please see tomorrow’s DAILY NATION for another report from The Nation/ Starcom national political survey which will focus on leadership, likeability and readiness to govern: public views on political leaders.
