Government denies talks with Caribbean nations over slave trade reparations
The government has denied it is set to hold talks with Caribbean representatives over reparations for the slave trade as one Labour MP called for the UK to take steps towards acknowledging the damage caused by its colonialist past.
The Foreign Office (FCDO) angrily denied reports on Saturday that it was to hold talks with a Caribbean delegation on reparations.
Clapham and Brixton Hill MP Bell Ribeiro-Addy, who chairs the APPG on Afrikan Reparations, said she had been 'surprised' by the initial reports in The Telegraph, but added it was 'a shame' they are not going ahead.
She told The Independent: 'Talks with CARICOM nations would be a significant step towards acknowledging the enduring harm caused by enslavement and colonialism. Critics often miscontrue the campaign for reparations as being solely about financial compensation, or historic events that have no relevance today.
'But for these countries our historic crimes play a central part in their present struggles. So reparations at its core is about equality and justice. There are many ways we can go about righting our wrongs, and that starts with a conversation.'
It had been reported that foreign secretary David Lammy had give Foreign Office officials the green light the FCDO to hold talks with embers of the Reparations Commission of the Caribbean Community (Caricom), a political grouping of 15 states, to discuss the UK paying for its past acts as a colonial power.
But in a statement on X, the FCDO claimed the reports were false.
'The Telegraph front page today is wrong and mendacious. There will be no such delegation of Caribbean leaders or officials in spring. We do not pay reparations.'
It had been speculated that the decision to hold the meeting follows last year gathering of Commonwealth heads of government in Samoa where Caribbean nations pressed the prime minister Keir Starmer into discussing the ongoing impact of historic slavery and reparations.
At the time, Sir Keir agreed to continue talking about the issue but had suggested he was against paying reparations.
Sources have suggested that the delegation would be led by Mia Mottley, Barbados's prime minister.
Ms Ribeiro-Addy's comments followed Tory shadow foreign secretary Priti Patel leading attacks against Mr Lammy on the issue linking it with controversial plans to hand over the Chagos Islands to Mauritius.
She said: 'When Labour negotiate, Britain loses. Having agreed to surrender billions of pounds of taxpayers money to Mauritius to giveaway the Chagos Islands, the rest of the world has seen how easy it is to force this weak and pathetic Labour Government to bend to their demands.
"Now we see that Keir Starmer and David Lammy have once again been caught out failing to defend the national interest. Instead of focusing on strengthening future trade and partnership ties with the Commonwealth, they are letting their Labour friends and activists set the agenda.
'Whether it's the surrender of Chagos, kowtowing to China, cosying up to the EU or considering reparations, Labour cannot be trusted to defend our interests and protect hard-pressed British taxpayers."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
What UK's Strategic Defense Review means for Ukraine
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced on June 2 that the United Kingdom is moving to "warfighting readiness," in large part in response to the full-scale invasion of Ukraine and the threat Russia poses to Europe. He made the comment as his government unveiled its latest Strategic Defense Review, which U.K. General Richard Barrons, one of the review's authors, described as the "most profound" change in U.K. defense in 150 years. The review sets out ambitious new targets, including at least 12 new attack submarines, fleets of drones and autonomous vehicles, as well as 7,000 new long-range weapons. Yet it also comes with urgent warnings. The review reveals that the U.K.'s Armed Forces are currently unprepared to fight adversaries such as Russia or China, nor could they conduct high-intensity warfare in a war like that in Ukraine. Insufficient munition stockpiles, low troop numbers, and ageing equipment are just a few of the weaknesses underpinning its assessment. "The speed of development in Ukraine is so far ahead of what countries like the U.K. is capable of." But as well as committing to bolstering its own defense capabilities, the U.K. must also manage the commitments already made to Kyiv, which it has vowed to support with a "100-year partnership." The U.K. has been one of Kyiv's closest supporters since the start of the full-scale invasion, and the review reiterates long-term support for Ukraine, committing 3 billion pounds ($4.06 billion) annually in military aid. "The bottom line is that all of this is about defending the U.K. after the conflict moves on from Ukraine primarily," Keir Giles, a senior consulting fellow at Chatham House, a U.K.-based think tank, told the Kyiv Independent. "Whether it's positive, negative, or catastrophic, either way, that's when the U.K. and its allies need to be ready for Russia's next move." The U.K. wants to create a more flexible procurement process, as demonstrated by that developed by Ukraine throughout the full-scale invasion, a dynamic it says would be vital should the U.K. deploy troops in support of a ceasefire. The review urges deeper defense industrial collaboration, including joint ventures and helping Ukraine access global markets, as well as rebuilding and sustaining its defense sector. This could include helping Ukraine service Soviet-era equipment still used abroad. The U.K. also aims to learn from Ukraine's experience in modern warfare, particularly in land combat, drones, and hybrid threats. However, the review highlights challenges — U.K. stockpiles of weapons such as Storm Shadow long-range missiles have been depleted through its support to Ukraine, and years of underinvestment have weakened domestic defense capacity. The U.K. has announced that it will build six new munition factories. This indicates a significant attempt to address one of the key criticisms of European defense, which is its lack of industrial base and reliance on U.S. support. While U.K. Defense Secretary John Healey has said that "we should expect to see new factories opening very soon," it is not clear how quickly this will translate into meaningful battlefield assistance for Ukraine's Armed Forces. "The speed of development in Ukraine is so far ahead of what countries like the U.K. are capable of, the best-case outcome for Ukraine would just be sending the money there to build stuff," Giles said. When asked how Ukraine could be best supported outside of the recommendations in the review, Giles said the "maximum support" should be given to Ukraine, without the hesitancy about doing damage to Russia." We've been working hard to bring you independent, locally-sourced news from Ukraine. Consider supporting the Kyiv Independent.
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The Daily T: Labour's winter fuel U-turn fires up Farage
Rachel Reeves finally confirmed Labour's rumoured U-turn on the winter fuel cut for pensioners this lunchtime, completing a humiliating climb down for the Government and reinstating the payments for around nine million elderly people. Nigel Farage was quick to take credit for the reversal in a speech in Wales, where he also called for domestic coal mines to be reopened and said Reform chairman Zia Yusuf 'lost his rag' when he resigned late last week – only to return on Saturday. Camilla and Gordon ask whether Reform's continual outflanking of the Tories like this is only cementing their place in the public's minds as the unofficial opposition. Later, they speak to the MP tabling a new free speech bill after a man was prosecuted for burning a Koran. Nick Timothy says that blasphemy laws are being brought in through the back door to quash criticism of Islam. Watch episodes of the Daily T here. You can also listen on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Martin Lewis gives his verdict on Labour's winter fuel payment U-turn
Money expert Martin Lewis has given his verdict on Labour's decision to partially reverse its changes to the annual winter fuel payment for pensioners. Chancellor Rachel Reeves has confirmed that while the payment will still not be paid to all pensioners as in previous years, it will be extended to far more than last winter. Around nine million more pensioners should get the payment as a result of the change – meaning about three quarters of pensioners overall are now eligible. Announcing the change, Ms Reeves said: 'Targeting winter fuel payments was a tough decision, but the right decision because of the inheritance we had been left by the previous government. 'It is also right that we continue to means-test this payment so that it is targeted and fair, rather than restoring eligibility to everyone including the wealthiest. 'But we have now acted to expand the eligibility of the winter fuel payment so no pensioner on a lower income will miss out.' The change essentially raises the threshold for receiving the payment from £11,600, plus the need to be claiming Pension Credit, to £35,000 with no additional requirements. Reacting to the news, Mr Lewis said the change is a 'very big improvement', but highlighted a piece of key information pensioners should be aware of regarding the decision. Crucially, pensioners with an income of over £35,000 will see their winter fuel payment 'clawed back' through the tax system (unless they opt out). But this can bring some slightly complicated rules for households with more than one pensioner which it may be helpful to understand. Mr Lewis gives an example: "You've got a household that's due to get £300 with two state pensioners in. That £300 for the clawback is treated as £150 and £150. 'So if this person earns over £35,000, they lose it. If this person earns under £35,000, they keep it; they still get £150. If both of them earn over £35,000, they both lose it. And if both of them earn under £35,000, they both keep it.' This is a relatively 'good system,' The Money Saving Expert founder says, as it means only one pensioner's income won't decide whether the entire payment is kept or not. Mr Lewis also said that he is 'very grateful to the Chancellor' for the decision, adding: 'This is a very big improvement on what we already had, and it does mean there's still a means test in place.' "And many people said they don't want millionaires and billionaires to get the Winter Fuel Payment. Well, they won't get the Winter Fuel Payment, they can either opt out or have it clawed back through the tax system. 'But it means far more pensioners who were struggling with still-high energy bills will get this payment.'
