Reparations debate latest example of politicians being afraid of the past

However, these circumstances, despite how clear cut they may seem, can also lead to cowardice, where our leaders hide behind abstract expressions of intent, rather than making promises, because it’s easier to look good than actually do something.

It is this approach that has stained Britain’s reputation this week, as the Prime Minister faced questions about reparations for the UK’s historic role in the slave trade.

Speaking on a visit where he met with Commonwealth leaders, the Government sought to stress this was all in the past, reparatory justice would not be on the agenda, and the UK is more focused on dealing with climate issues and debt in the Commonwealth.

This is an understandable defence, not least because a 2023 report co-authored by a United Nations’ judge concluded that the UK owed more than £18 trillion to 14 countries in reparations. Given the UK Government spends about £1.2tn a year, it obviously can’t afford to pay this. But that is no excuse for shutting down the debate, or hiding behind historical legacy.

There are other options. Formal apologies. Education. Environmental support. A hard no is simply not good enough. To flat out deny reparations shows a failure to take accountability, and speaks to a Government afraid of its past.

It was the same when during the rise of Black Lives Matter in Britain, some figures refused to accept that some institutions might no longer want statues of slavers. It was the same when MPs were confronted over Churchill’s involvement in the Bengal famine, there were cries to stop people learning about it.

Refusing to engage with history is a choice the Government is making, but it’s one many in the Commonwealth don’t have the luxury of making. The scars of Britain’s involvement run deep, the legacy of slavery isn’t a thing that just goes away because Britain isn’t interested, nor does it disappear if ministers say focusing on climate change is the priority. At the risk of stating the obvious, it’s entirely possible to care about two things at once. As for the argument offered by ministers that Commonwealth countries face huge debts and are the most impacted by climate change, and that’s where the focus should be, I think it’s a bit much to expect the same levels of affluence and infrastructure from countries whose people were forcibly removed.

Again, this doesn’t have to be about the money, but it’s a disgrace where payouts have been made. As Labour MP Dawn Butler said during a black history month debate in the Commons this week, 46,000 individuals received Government compensation following the abolition of slavery. They were the slavers.

Speaking during BBC’s Politics Live on Friday, Dr Parth Patel of the Institute for Public Policy Research argued Keir Starmer loves to lament a bad inheritance after 14 years of Tory rule, so what of the inheritance for the countries still dealing with the impact of colonisation? He is right.

This isn’t a political issue, it’s a moral one. Treat it as a relationship building exercise, protecting the future of the Commonwealth. At least have the conversation.