Commonwealth leaders have defied the prime minister by agreeing that the “time has come” to discuss reparations for the slave trade. The UK was unable to keep language regarding reparations out of a joint statement signed at the end of the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting (Chogm), following an intense row over the issue earlier this week during a major two-day summit in Samoa where Keir Starmer was present.
Prime Minister, Sir Keir Starmer, was informed that discussions needed to address the ‘ill effects’ of slavery. Despite his plea for the group to focus on the future rather than the past, the UK government has consistently rejected the idea of offering reparations or an apology for its involvement in slavery. The final communique signed by 56 Commonwealth leaders expressed the need for a “meaningful, truthful and respectful conversation towards forging a common future based on equity”.
During a press conference at the close of the conference, Sir Keir reiterated his condemnation of slavery as “abhorrent” but maintained the UK’s stance on not providing compensation for its historical role. The document signed by Commonwealth leaders acknowledged the significance of discussions on reparatory justice concerning the trans-Atlantic slave trade and chattel enslavement, and committed to inclusive conversations addressing the enduring effects of these atrocities on member states of the Commonwealth.
When asked about the inclusion of reparations language affecting UK-Council relations, Sir Keir emphasised the theme of climate resilience as the priority of the summit. The prime minister downplayed the prominence of the reparations issue by stating that talks had not revolved around money during the event. He clarified that the focus had been on resilience and climate discussions, rather than on financial compensation.
Moving forward, the Commonwealth leaders agreed to actively participate in facilitating discussions addressing the historical harms and injustices, with a specific focus on the disproportionate suffering experienced by women and girls due to these tragic events in human history.
In conclusion, the Commonwealth’s acknowledgment of the need for reparations discussions marks a significant step towards addressing historical injustices and forging a path towards a more equitable future. The refusal of the UK government to engage in such conversations underscores the ongoing complexities surrounding the legacy of slavery and the challenges in seeking redress for past wrongs. It remains to be seen how these discussions will unfold and whether they will lead to tangible steps towards reparations and reconciliation.