Lord Nelson paintings scrapped in Parliament diversity drive
Paintings of Lord Nelson have been taken down as part of plans to make artworks in Parliament more diverse, The Telegraph can reveal.
Pictures of the British naval hero have been taken down following an MP-led review of parliamentary art linked to slavery and racism.
Two images of Nelson have been taken down since the Black Lives Matter-inspired project began in 2020, including one depicting the commander dying for his country at the Battle of Trafalgar.
A portrait of Sir Francis Drake, another naval commander has also been removed.
Nelson was criticised by Black Lives Matter activists for alleged personal support of slavery, and Drake was targeted for his youthful involvement in the slave trade.
While images of national heroes have been removed, portraits of Labour grandees including Ms Cooper, the Home Secretary, have been installed as part of ongoing efforts to boost gender and ethnic diversity.
The portraits form part of the Parliamentary Art Collection overseen by the Speaker's Advisory Committee on Works of Art, a cross-party group of MPs.
This manages the slavery review, which aims to increase the representation of minorities in Parliamentary artworks, as well as separate efforts to include more portraits of women.
Ms Cooper has personally made the case for increasing the representation in the Parliamentary Art Collection as part of a Labour mission to 'modernise' Westminster.
Speaking in 2024, she said: 'Westminster is a changing place, with more women MPs, people from ethnic minorities and people with disabilities.
'It would be great to see this change increasingly represented in the artwork around the estate, providing encouragement and inspiration for future generations of politicians.'
As part of the ongoing work of diversification, a portrait of Baroness Hodge, the Labour peer and former culture secretary, has been installed since 2020.
Four portraits of Lord Protector Oliver Cromwell have been taken down in the same period. The staunch Parliamentarian was named as a supporter of the slave trade in the MP-led review of artworks purportedly linked to slavery.
A portrait of Baroness Hoey, the former Labour minister, has also been put on display following the commitment to diversify Parliamentary art.
Meanwhile, images of William Pitt the Elder and George Canning, both former prime ministers, were taken down, along with a print depicting the abolitionist William Wilberforce.
Depictions of Millicent Fawcett and Barbara Duvall, the Suffragist campaigners, have been installed as part of the drive to increase the representation of women, along with a painting of Baroness May, the former prime minister.
Despite the aim of increasing the representation of women in Parliament, four images of Elizabeth I have been removed. These depict the defeat of the Spanish Armada, and the monarch commissioning Sir Walter Raleigh to begin colonial expansion in the Americas.
Four images of Sir Lindsay Hoyle, the Labour MP and Speaker, have been installed on the parliamentary estate, which includes the Palace of Westminster and outlying office buildings.
While ongoing work has led to the gradual removal and installation of work under the supervision of the Speaker's advisory committee on works of art since 2020, following Labour's 2024 election win, swift changes were made.
The Telegraph revealed that in the immediate wake of the landslide, portraits of Sir Winston Churchill and the Duke of Wellington were removed from Parliament.
This followed revelations that Sir Keir Starmer rid No 10 of portraits depicting Elizabeth I, Sir Walter Raleigh, Margaret Thatcher and William Shakespeare following his arrival in Downing Street.
Rachel Reeves, the Chancellor, has also made changes to No 11, where portraits of David Lloyd George and Benjamin Disraeli, the former prime ministers, have been replaced with artworks about mental health.
A spokesman for UK Parliament said: 'There are more than 26,000 items within Parliament's collections, and there are regular movements, for example, due to maintenance works in an area, changes to the occupancy of offices or spaces and conservation needs.'
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.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
3 hours ago
- USA Today
The LA immigration riots reminds that neither party cares about law and order
The LA immigration riots reminds that neither party cares about law and order | Opinion Democrats and Republicans have a history of ignoring the law when it suits their political needs. Show Caption Hide Caption Newsom, Trump latest clash in long-standing feud Governor Gavin Newsom hit back at the Trump administration for deploying military troops to LA following ICE protests. President Donald Trump and California Gov. Gavin Newsom have been fighting over protests and riots taking place in Los Angeles. In response to attacks on federal immigration officers, Trump involved the National Guard and members of the military in order to get things under control. Newsom responded by asking the courts to intervene and saying Trump has "lost it." But this controversy is exhausting because it is clear that nobody involved is interested in the even distribution of justice. Everyone is acting to serve their own political ends, which has been happening for years. Neither political party has a monopoly on law and order. Those who think their preferred party is the one that truly champions the rule of law are falling for partisan lies and likely have a short memory. Democrats and Republicans have undermined the rule of law There is a great irony to Trump aggressively responding to the June LA riots when he just months ago pardoned those charged with crimes in the riot at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, including those who assaulted police officers. Trump's law and order campaign is entirely theatrical. He has no problem pardoning perpetrators of political violence or crime otherwise when they are aligned with him. He rewards people who commit political violence on his behalf and brings down the hammer against those who do so in the name of causes he is opposed to. It is a completely partisan scheme that goes against what the rule of law actually means. That doesn't mean I disagree with Trump, though. When cities like LA hardly do anything to stop violence, Trump gets the political opportunity to step in and stop riots. Now, these protests are spreading to more cities, which is likely to result in broader violence and more fights with the executive. Opinion: Newsom comes with too much baggage. Democrats need a new voice for 2028. That goes both ways. Remember when Democrats tried to market themselves as the party of law and order as Trump faced a slate of criminal trials during his reelection campaign. That's laughable in light of their past actions. Democrats rightly blamed Trump for his provocation in 2021 after Democrats did the same thing during the Black Lives Matter riots of 2020. There was no shortage of elected Democrats who simply stood by as violence and looting swept the country, and in some cases, they actively encouraged such violence. Biden was no better on the pardons front, brazenly using the presidential pen to corruptly pardon his son and other family members. Biden has previously posted on social media that nobody is above the law. Neither major party really cares about political violence; they only care about it when they can score political points or when they have to defend themselves against the ramifications of it. Following the law has become a partisan issue America now has different rules for enforcing the law, depending on who is in charge. It doesn't matter if you assaulted police officers while breaking into the U.S. Capitol; you'll be generously pardoned four years later. It doesn't matter if you participate in mass riots and looting in the name of racial justice, Democrats will sit by idly as you do more than $1 billion in damage to American cities. I am exhausted by watching politicians pretend that they care about violence beyond the political forces that it brings. Opinion: Trump's dysfunctional government can learn from these Republican governors It's clear that neither major party can be trusted to present leaders whom Americans can believe will enforce the rule of law justly. However, the best solution for our problem of partisan law and order is to stop electing leaders whom we cannot trust to enforce the law impartially. The past two administrations have done much to undermine the rule of law, and Americans eventually need to decide that we are sick of it. Dace Potas is an opinion columnist for USA TODAY and a graduate of DePaul University with a degree in political science.
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Starmer focused on grooming victims not ‘grandstanding', says Reeves
Sir Keir Starmer has been focused on the 'victims' of grooming gangs and not 'grandstanding', Rachel Reeves has suggested, after the Prime Minister committed to a national inquiry. The Chancellor said that Sir Keir has been looking at 'actually doing the practical things to ensure that something like this never happens again'. After initially resisting pressure to implement a full probe, the Prime Minister said he had read 'every single word' of an independent report into child sexual exploitation by Baroness Louise Casey and would accept her recommendation for the investigation. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper is set to address Parliament on Monday about the findings of the review. Reform UK leader Nigel Farage described the move as a 'welcome U-turn', while Kemi Badenoch called on him to apologise for 'six wasted months'. Asked whether the Prime Minister had changed his mind about the idea of a national inquiry, the Chancellor told the Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg programme: 'I think Keir Starmer, our Prime Minister, has always been really focused, as he was when he was director of public prosecutions, on the victims and not grandstanding. 'But actually doing the practical things to ensure that something like this never happens again, but also to ensure that the victims of this horrific abuse over many, many years is got to grips with and that people have answers to their questions.' Earlier this year, the Government dismissed calls for a public inquiry, saying its focus was on putting in place the outstanding recommendations already made in a seven-year national inquiry by Professor Alexis Jay. Shadow chancellor Sir Mel Stride criticised the Government's 'very late' decision to launch the inquiry, and claimed it had only come after pressure from the Tories. Sir Mel told BBC One's Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg: 'It's a very late decision – it should have happened far, far earlier. 'We've been calling for this for many, many months.' He accused Sir Keir of previously dismissing concerns from senior Tory figures. 'Kemi Badenoch, Chris Philp and others have been derided by the Prime Minister for hopping on some kind of far-right bandwagon, dog-whistle politics and the rest of it,' Sir Mel said. 'That was the wrong response. This is just another example of the Prime Minister being pressurised by us into U-turning.' The inquiry will be able to compel witnesses to give evidence, and it is understood that it will be national in scope, co-ordinating a series of targeted local investigations. Speaking to reporters travelling with him on his visit to Canada on Saturday, the Prime Minister said: 'I have never said we should not look again at any issue. 'I have wanted to be assured that on the question of any inquiry. 'That's why I asked Louise Casey who I hugely respect to do an audit. 'Her position when she started the audit was that there was not a real need for a national inquiry over and above what was going on. 'She has looked at the material she has looked at and she has come to the view that there should be a national inquiry on the basis of what she has seen. 'I have read every single word of her report and I am going to accept her recommendation. 'That is the right thing to do on the basis of what she has put in her audit.'
Hamilton Spectator
4 hours ago
- Hamilton Spectator
U.K. PM Starmer in Ottawa to talk trade, Middle East conflict with Carney ahead of G7
OTTAWA - British Prime Minister Keir Starmer is in Ottawa to meet with Prime Minister Mark Carney today before the two leaders leave for the G7 leaders' summit in Alberta. He will meet Carney this morning in his West Block office on Parliament Hill before both leaders fly separately to Calgary. Last night, Starmer had dinner with Carney at his official residence at Rideau Cottage, later taking in the hockey game between the Edmonton Oilers and the Florida Panthers. Starmer's visit comes as Canada seeks to reopen trade talks with the U.K. which were paused early in 2024, leaving in place a temporary deal signed after Brexit. There's a sticking point around Britain wanting to ban exports of hormone-treated beef from Canada and calls from British farmers to export more cheese to Canada's protected dairy sector. The conflict in the Middle East is likely also on the agenda after the exchange of missiles between Israel and Iran and both countries call for de-escalation while affirming Israel's right to defence. Starmer says he has positioned British jets for 'contingency support in the region,' The Associated Press reports. Last month both leaders joined French President Emmanuel Macron to sign a strongly worded statement about Israel's restrictions on food aid reaching the Gaza Strip. This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 15, 2025. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
