Question
Shamefully, some 12.5 million slaves were sent across the Atlantic during the slave trade, and it is reckoned that 90% of them were captured and traded in horrific circumstances by African kings. Does the Minister agree that it would be ridiculous to hold the descendants of those African kings responsible for the sins of their fathers? Should we not learn from the King, our chief diplomat, by expressing sorrow from the depth of our soul, but not getting involved in apologies, let alone reparations?
Answer
I reassure the Father of the House that, as I said in my statement, there is no plan for, and our position has not changed on, reparations. I will not comment on any other countries’ part in the slave trade or any other type of offence, whatever the grievance, but this constructive dialogue is a clear way forward to engaging with Commonwealth nations, including African countries. It is about working and moving forward in the best way possible, and in a way that is honest and straightforward. I would argue strongly that those are British values. This is about a hope that this country can look forward, move forward and ensure that the Commonwealth is fit for the future, and does not simply focus on the past.50% vibes
Verdict: AMBER (26/100)
The reply gives a clear, direct answer on reparations, stating that there is no plan for them and that the government's position has not changed. It only partly engages with the question of whether descendants should be held responsible for the actions of African rulers, and its answer there is hedged. It does not address whether expressing sorrow for the slave trade is appropriate, and it declines to comment on other countries' role. A member of the public would likely need to ask again about sorrow and about descendant responsibility.
How we got there
| Question item | Coverage | Specificity | Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the Minister agree that it would be ridiculous to hold the descendants of African kings responsible for the actions of their ancestors in the slave trade? | Partially Addressed | Hedged | The reply never says whether the Minister agrees it would be ridiculous to hold African kings' descendants responsible. Statement 1 restates the unchanged position on reparations, which is adjacent to the question of responsibility, and statement 2 declines to comment on other countries' part in the slave trade, but neither engages with the descendant-responsibility point itself. |
| Does the Government consider it appropriate to express sorrow for the slave trade? | Not Addressed | Generic | The question asks whether expressing sorrow for the slave trade is appropriate, and no statement mentions sorrow; statement 2 is a refusal to comment on other countries' involvement, which does not answer the question. |
| Should the Government refrain from making apologies or paying reparations for the slave trade, while expressing sorrow? | Partially Addressed | Direct | Statement 1 gives a clear, direct position that there is no plan for reparations and that the position has not changed, which answers the reparations half of the question. Nothing addresses apologies or the broader 'express sorrow but do not apologise' framing, so the item is only partly covered. |