The United Kingdom has signalled a possible shift in its position on the transatlantic slave trade, with Andy Burnham, the Prime Minister saying he is open to a formal state apology but ruling out financial reparations to countries affected by slavery.
Burnham said Britain needed to confront its historical role in the trafficking and enslavement of Africans, describing the trade as a “brutal and barbaric violation”. However, he argued that people living in Britain today should not be held financially responsible for historical crimes committed centuries ago.
“I do not think that British people today can be held liable for historical wrongs, however heinous, that happened in a different age under different laws and in which they played no personal part,” he wrote in an article for The Guardian.
Read also:
His comments come ahead of the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting, scheduled to begin on November 1 in Antigua, where the question of Britain’s historical responsibility for slavery is expected to feature in discussions. King Charles III is due to open the summit as part of his Caribbean tour, which has renewed attention on calls for an apology and reparatory justice.
Burnham said Commonwealth countries had long sought an honest conversation about Britain’s role in slavery. He proposed a structured dialogue with affected countries and communities, saying calls for a formal apology on behalf of the British state would form an important part of the process.
“I am open to them,” he said.
The position has been welcomed by the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Afrikan Reparations, although its chairwoman, Bell Ribeiro-Addy, said the government had not gone far enough by stopping short of a formal apology.
Read also:
Speaking to BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Ribeiro-Addy said acknowledging Britain’s role was not the same as accepting responsibility for its consequences.
“Acknowledgement is not the same as understanding,” she said, arguing that a formal apology would be an important step towards addressing historical injustice. “Until we apologise, we are never going to be on equal footing.”
Ribeiro-Addy also challenged the focus on financial compensation, saying the debate over reparative justice was broader than money. She noted that, to her knowledge, no invoice for financial reparations had been presented to the UK, and argued that concentrating on potential payments risked overlooking calls for recognition and accountability.
The government’s position has also drawn support from senior ministers and opposition figures. Chancellor John Healey said Burnham was open to discussing an apology because it was the right thing to do, particularly ahead of the Commonwealth summit. However, he reiterated that the government did not consider financial reparations appropriate.
Read also:
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch also rejected compensation, arguing that British taxpayers should not be held financially responsible for events that took place generations before they were born. In a post on X, she criticised Burnham’s willingness to discuss an apology, saying the government should not take on additional financial commitments.
Across the Caribbean, however, calls for reparatory justice remain central to the debate. Barbados Prime Minister Mia Mottley, who has consistently advocated reparations, welcomed Burnham’s statement and said she would engage in good faith while maintaining her country’s position.
Denis O’Brien, founder of The Repair Campaign, described the British government’s response as inadequate, insisting that it should issue a full formal apology.
“The British government must stop obfuscating and give a full and formal apology now,” he said, describing such a move as a significant symbolic first step towards reparatory justice.
A long-running debate over Britain’s historical role
The debate comes as King Charles visits Caribbean countries, with renewed attention on the monarchy’s historical connections to slavery. During his visit to the Bahamas, the King referred to the “suffering of the past”, while in Guyana he visited the site of a rebellion by enslaved people against British authorities.
Britain played a prominent role in the transatlantic slave trade from the 16th century, with English authorities and the monarchy involved in the system that transported millions of Africans to the Americas. Although Parliament passed legislation abolishing slavery in most of the British Empire in 1833, the law compensated slave owners for the loss of the people they had enslaved. The government-funded debt used to finance those payments was not fully repaid until 2015.
Previous British prime ministers have expressed regret over the country’s involvement without committing to reparations. Tony Blair described Britain’s role in the trade as a matter of “deep sorrow and regret” in 2007. David Cameron rejected reparations during a visit to Jamaica in 2015, urging Caribbean countries to move on, while Rishi Sunak dismissed calls for an apology and reparatory justice in 2023. In 2024, Keir Starmer also ruled out compensation, saying he wanted to focus on the future of the Commonwealth.
The renewed debate also carries diplomatic significance for Britain. Downing Street sees stronger Commonwealth relations as important at a time when China and Russia are seeking to expand their influence among developing countries. But for Caribbean governments and campaigners, the issue goes beyond diplomatic ties, touching on historical accountability, the legacy of slavery and the terms on which former colonies engage with Britain.
Burnham’s proposal for dialogue may create an opening for further engagement, but the gap between Britain’s position and the demands of reparations advocates remains unresolved. Whether a formal apology emerges from the discussions will be an important test of how far the government is prepared to go in addressing the country’s role in the slave trade.
Related News
Faith Omoboye is a foreign affairs correspondent with background in History and International relations. Her work focuses on African politics, diplomacy, and global governance.
Source: