Latest news with #BellRibeiro-Addy
Western Telegraph
07-05-2025
- Health
- Western Telegraph
Starmer faces backbench rebellion over Pip benefit squeeze, Labour MPs indicate
One of the party's MPs Ian Byrne (Liverpool West Derby) said he would 'swim through vomit to vote against' proposed welfare changes. He was joined in criticising the policy by his Labour colleagues Richard Burgon (Leeds East), Rachael Maskell (York Central), Andy McDonald (Middlesbrough and Thornaby East), Cat Eccles (Stourbridge), Nadia Whittome (Nottingham East), Imran Hussain (Bradford East) and Ian Lavery (Blyth and Ashington), who each said they were among the MPs who would vote against the Government's proposals. If the Government's going to recoup costs from somewhere, they should cast their gaze away from some of the most vulnerable in our society and instead look at those with the broadest shoulders Bell Ribeiro-Addy, Labour MP In its Pathways to Work Green Paper, the Government has proposed tightening the eligibility requirements for the personal independence payment, known as Pip. A claimant must score a minimum of four points on one Pip daily living activity, such as preparing food, washing and bathing, using the toilet or reading, to receive the daily living element of the benefit. According to the document, 'this means that people who only score the lowest points on each of the Pip daily living activities will lose their entitlement in future'. Speaking in Westminster Hall, Labour's Bell Ribeiro-Addy said: 'My biggest fear overall is that we may ultimately count the cost of these cuts in lost lives. 'Lest we forget that study that attributed 330,000 excess deaths in Britain between 2012 and 2019 to the last round of austerity cuts. 'There's no denying that the number of people who are claiming sickness and disability benefits are rising, but we can't ignore the fact that increasing claimants are linked to an ageing population and a decade of underinvestment in our health services. 'If the Government's going to recoup costs from somewhere, they should cast their gaze away from some of the most vulnerable in our society and instead look at those with the broadest shoulders.' The MP for Clapham and Brixton Hill told MPs that the move will 'not win the Government any favours with the electorate'. Last week, we saw the people's judgment of unpopular, unnecessary and immoral cuts Ian Byrne, Labour MP Quoting former Labour shadow chancellor John McDonnell, who sits as the independent MP for Hayes and Harlington, Mr Byrne said: ''I will swim through vomit to vote against' them. 'I cannot express to the minister (Sir Stephen Timms) the scale of the devastation this will have on disabled people in my constituency and indeed the country.' Mr Byrne later continued: 'This is not what the Labour Party was formed to do. 'So I conclude with this appeal to the minister, we were elected last summer on a promise of 'change'. These cruel cuts are not the change people voted for. 'Last week, we saw the people's judgment of unpopular, unnecessary and immoral cuts.' Mother of the House Diane Abbott, the Labour MP for Hackney North and Stoke Newington who tabled Wednesday's debate, accused the Government of putting forward 'contradictory arguments'. She said: 'On the one hand, they insist they are helping the disabled by putting them back to work. 'But on the other hand, they say this cut will save £9 billion. In the short run, putting disabled people into jobs will not save money, it will actually cost more Diane Abbott, Labour MP 'Well, you can't do both. 'Putting disabled people into rewarding, sustained employment – which we would all support – means spending money, money on training, therapy, childcare. 'In the short run, putting disabled people into jobs will not save money, it will actually cost more. 'The only certain way that cutting Pip saves the billions of pounds that the Government wants is by making Pip recipients live on less, and this is something ministers claim that they do not want to do.' But David Pinto-Duschinsky, the Labour MP for Hendon, said MPs cannot 'ignore this issue' of health-related benefit claimant figures rising at, on some metrics, 'twice the rate of underlying health conditions'. He suggested a wealth tax is a 'speculative' solution, and said: 'Exactly because the system is so essential, we must also safeguard its future.' Responding to the debate, social security minister Sir Stephen said: 'Claims to Pip are set to more than double, from two million to over 4.3 million this decade, partly accounted for by a 17% increase in disability prevalence, that's been mentioned, but the increase in benefit caseload is much, much higher. 'And it would certainly not be in the interests of people currently claiming the benefits for the Government to bury its head in the sand over that rate of increase. We want a more proactive, pro-work system that supports people better and supports the economy as well Sir Stephen Timms, social security minister 'So following the Green Paper, we're consulting on how best to support those affected by the eligibility changes, we're looking to improve the Pip assessment – as has been mentioned, I'm going to lead a review of that – but the current system produces poor employment outcomes, high economic inactivity, low living standards, high costs to the taxpayer. 'It needs to change. 'We want a more proactive, pro-work system that supports people better and supports the economy as well.'
The Guardian
25-03-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
Most Britons do not know scale of UK's involvement in slavery, survey finds
Britons are widely ignorant of the scale and legacy of Britain's involvement in slavery and colonialism, a survey has found, with the vast majority unaware how many people were enslaved, how long the trade went on for, or for how long UK taxpayers were paying off a government loan to 'compensate' enslavers after abolition. The poll, released to coincide with Tuesday's UN International Day of Remembrance of the Victims of Slavery and the Transatlantic Slave Trade, was commissioned by the Repair Campaign, which is working with Caricom to secure reparatory justice for member states through health, education and infrastructure projects. The sample of more than 2,000 people representative of the UK population found 85% did not know that more than 3 million people had been forcibly shipped from Africa to the Caribbean by British enslavers. It also found 89% were unaware British merchants had enslaved people in the Caribbean for more than 300 years and that 75% did not know it was after 2000 that British taxpayers finished paying off the money borrowed by UK government in 1833 – equivalent to 40% of the government's total annual expenditure at the time – to compensate enslavers for their 'loss of property'. Nonetheless, the survey found support for some form of reparations is growing, with 63% now agreeing that Caribbean nations and descendants of enslaved people should receive a formal apology, up 4% from last year's poll, while support for financial reparations has also increased, with 40% now in favour. Ninety percent of those in favour of financial reparations said they should be directed toward long-term education, health and infrastructure projects. Bell Ribeiro-Addy, a Labour MP and chair of the all-party parliamentary group for Afrikan Reparations, said she was 'not surprised' about the lack of understanding about the scale of slavery, and that reparative justice also required education. 'People point to reparations and think merely in financial terms, but one of the most important things is correcting the record – because until people learn what happened there will not be that widespread, public will to make reparation possible,' she said. The Labour government has said the UK will not pay cash reparations, but is working with Caribbean partners on issues such as security, growth and climate change. Ribeiro-Addy said there had to be a 'willingness to listen' from the UK government, which is yet to make a formal apology for slavery, faced with a 'large chunk of the world' that was unified on the need for reparative justice. 'For us not to listen is disgraceful and could have consequences of its own,' she added. Walker Syachalinga, a solicitor at the law firm Leigh Day, which is investigating claims against institutions, companies and families, said of the survey's findings: 'They speak to what has been a feature of English law and commerce – this idea of offshoring the more unpalatable aspects of our history while retaining the benefits.' Denis O'Brien, Repair Campaign's founder, said the poll showed 'heartening' growth in public support for an apology and reparations, but also 'how little people in Britain really know about the country's past.' Dr Hilary Brown, a programme manager at Caricom Secretariat, said: 'Our shared humanity demands justice for the horrific crimes committed. Addressing the knowledge gap in the UK on the country's history of trading and enslaving Africans is urgent.'
Zawya
24-03-2025
- Business
- Zawya
Ghana and United Kingdom (UK) Strengthen Economic Ties: Finance Minister Hosts United Kingdom (UK) Trade Envoy
The Minister for Finance, Hon. Dr. Cassiel Ato Forson, has reaffirmed Ghana's commitment to deepening economic cooperation with the United Kingdom following a high-level meeting with the UK Trade Envoy to Ghana, Bell Ribeiro-Addy, and Akosua Dentaa Amoateng MBE. During the discussions, Hon. Dr. Ato Forson underscored the urgent need to finalize the bilateral agreement between Ghana and the UK. He noted that ongoing debt restructuring had delayed several critical projects, and securing this agreement would provide the necessary support for their swift commencement. With France already committing to a similar agreement, he expressed optimism that the UK would follow suit soon. Beyond trade and investment, the meeting also explored opportunities for technical collaboration, particularly in tax administration. The Minister highlighted Ghana's plans for a major VAT reform and expressed interest in learning from the UK's highly efficient VAT system. He emphasized the importance of fostering collaboration between the UK's HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) and the Ghana Revenue Authority (GRA) to strengthen Ghana's tax policies and enhance revenue mobilization. Bell Ribeiro-Addy, a UK Member of Parliament with Ghanaian heritage, reassured the Minister of the UK's commitment to resetting its relationship with Ghana and other Commonwealth nations. She stressed that the UK views Ghana as a strategic partner rather than merely a former colony and is keen to work together towards shared economic prosperity. Hon. Dr. Ato Forson welcomed these assurances and reiterated Ghana's readiness to enhance cooperation with the UK across various sectors. He expressed hope that the discussions would soon translate into concrete actions that drive economic growth and development for both nations. Distributed by APO Group on behalf of Ministry of Finance - Republic of Ghana.
The Independent
19-03-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
Why UK museums aren't handing back human remains, despite calls to do so
The display of human remains in museums has long been a contentious issue. Last week, the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Afrikan Reparations (APPG-AR) published a report on the African human remains collected by British museums during, and due to, colonialism and the slave trade. Introduced by the MP Bell Ribeiro-Addy (the APPG-AR's chair), and produced by Afford (The African Foundation for Development), the publication of the report, Laying Ancestors to Rest, is another high-profile and meaningful intervention in an area where developments now seem inevitable. The report makes a number of recommendations. First, that the sale of human remains should be made illegal in the UK. It also suggests that the Human Tissue Act of 2004 should be amended to make stipulations about remains older than 100 years. This would include banning their public display without consent from the Human Tissue Authority and ensuring that museums obtain a licence from the authority for their storage. It's further recommended that the UK parliament's culture, media and sport committee should launch an inquiry into restitution. Laying Ancestors to Rest should be welcomed. It seems likely to be successful in achieving at least one of its recommendations. Calling for a ban on the trade in human remains in Britain, as the report does, is not particularly controversial. However, the report's blanket approach towards banning the display of human remains without consent is, in the present environment, unlikely to succeed. The report itself hints at the reasons for this. The success of its recommendations rests on the financial health of the UK's museum landscape. Resources matter, not least in terms of the relationships which those resources allow museums to build. Instead of a blanket response, developments in this area are likely to be piecemeal – both due to the significant effort required to carry out the task effectively and the limited resources many museums have to do so. In that sense, it is unclear whether calling for a blanket ban now is all that useful, other than as a wake-up call. This point is not to absolve museums for their historical part in this situation. It is though, to argue that work in understanding the collections of human remains held by British museums – where they come from, who they might belong to – has, at times (and certainly not in all circumstances), been happening. It is also to clarify what the often slow-paced norms of effective understanding and restitution are. In 2020, for example, the University of Oxford 's Pitt Rivers Museum removed its well-known collection of tsantsa (shrunken heads) from display. The removal happened with a view to working with Shuar and Achuar delegates to decide on the best way forward with regard to the care and display of the human remains. That work continues. A few years earlier, Laura Peers, then curator of the Americas collections at the museum, wrote about the slow, quiet and bureaucratic process of returning a single femur 'collected by a missionary as a medical curiosity, from an Indigenous nation with whom I have longstanding professional and personal relationships'. Such work is, when it happens, painstaking and careful. Even with the best of intentions, it is not a fast process. Funding restitution The often-halting nature of that work is likely to continue. Museum professionals – particularly newer museum professionals – know that this work has to happen and are, I would argue, in large part invested in doing it. In a contemporary funding environment marked by almost continuous cuts, even the most dedicated staff will find their actions curtailed. They may, in some cases, be able to remove remains from display, as the report recommends (and as the Pitt Rivers Museum has done). However, securing consent for the limited display of mummified Egyptian bodies, for instance, will be challenging. Without funding, it is difficult to build the relationships necessary for conversations about consent, ownership and restitution. In his afterword to the report, Dan Hicks of the University of Oxford writes that 'this is a time of immense hope and optimism for British museums'. The problem is that that hope in part rests on the funding that he also admits has been subject to 'austerity and swingeing cuts'. The contradiction is not difficult to see – particularly when the report's recommendations are similar to the 2018 one written for French collections by cultural researchers Felwine Sarr and Bénédicte Savoy. The Restitution of African Cultural Heritage: Toward a New Relational Ethics, which was commissioned by the French president, Emmanuel Macron, has been widely read. It has catalysed thinking beyond current international legal norms when it comes to restitution. Yet progress on the goal of restitution even in France has been slow, at least in part due to the time involved in building the new relationships that the report calls for. There is also the question of whether attitudes regarding restitution within African countries are consistent. By February 2024, France had returned only 26 objects to Benin and one (a sword) to Senegal. Worse still, the legislative picture across British collections remains complex. Collections such as the Pitt Rivers Museum have been able to move on restitution because they are university collections. As such, they are subject to different legislation than 'national' collections such as the British Museum or the V&A, which were established by acts of parliament and are funded by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport. As the V&A's director, Tristram Hunt, recently wrote, the UK's national museums remain in 'debilitating stasis' on restitution. Hunt argues that this is the case because these collections are hampered by the proscriptions of the 1983 National Heritage Act. That act – by rule or by choice, dependent on your view – effectively forbids such collections from disposing of objects, including human remains. As Laying Ancestors to Rest recommends, this situation needs to change. The likelihood is, however, that any change will come more slowly and with more deliberation even than the report itself acknowledges is necessary. Progress on this issue is by no means impossible. But without real political will and without the money to back it up, a blanket approach to the display and restitution of human remains in British museums remains difficult to enforce.
Telegraph
13-03-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
Displaying Egyptian mummies is ‘morally wrong and should be illegal'
Displaying ancient Egyptian mummies in museums is morally wrong and should be made illegal, according to a group of MPs. The All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) for Afrikan Reparations has claimed that displaying Egyptian mummies is 'unethical' and disrespects 'wishes of the ancestors'. The group, chaired by Bell Ribeiro-Addy, a Labour MP, has called for legal changes to make popular displays of ancient mummified remains 'an offence'. MPs argued in a report called Laying the Ancestors to Rest that changes should be made to the Human Tissue Act 2004, which regulates the storage and display of remains. The report states that mummies were acquired under 'colonial regimes of exploitation' and that the image of 'the mummy' offers 'exoticised mystique for the Western audience'. It adds that mummies became 'object of racist pseudoscientific research, including in efforts to evidence that Egyptians were white Europeans'. Many African academics have attempted to argue that ancient Egyptians were black, a common belief in Afrocentric circles. Mummies are displayed in museums around the world, including in South Africa and Egypt itself. MPs in the APPG have, however, called on the UK government to prevent the sale of human remains, and to facilitate their return from museum collections to their countries of origin. Human remains are held by major institutions including the British Museum, the Natural History Museum and the museum attached to units including Oxford. Examples include Australian Aboriginal and Native American remains, South American shrunken heads, and bog bodies unearthed in the UK. During the 19th century, human remains were collected from around the world for scientific and anthropological research, often to provide objects of study in the discredited field of phrenology. A policy of returning human remains will assist the African diaspora in 'healing from the traumas of enslavement and colonial violence', the report has claimed. In a foreword to the report, Ms Ribeiro-Addy wrote that the new recommendations address 'the ethical, cultural and historical concerns surrounding African ancestral remains – many of which were taken during colonial rule'. She added: 'The continued presence of these remains in British institutions causes profound distress to diaspora communities and countries of origin, particularly when they are displayed or sold at auction.' The report notes that the display of human remains has become increasingly contentious in the 'context of ongoing debates about restitution and reparations '. Ms Ribeiro-Addy has long called for the UK to pay slavery reparations and in February spoke in Parliament to urge the Government to 'play a constructive role in addressing our country's legacy of slavery and colonialism'. The APPG for Afrikan Reparations also includes Clive Lewis, a Labour MP who has called for payments to be made to Caribbean nations, and Dianne Abbott, who last year called on Sir Keir Starmer to take action on the issue of reparations.
