by Justin Welby, Independent
As the King’s tour of the Caribbean reignites the debate about reparations for the slave trade, the moral case is not on the side of the Commonwealth, says former Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby
There are so many reasons why the idea of reparations for slavery is wrong.
You can’t define who should receive or who should pay. The UK of 2026 is a totally different country from that of 1833 (at the abolition of slavery in the British Empire). Many UK taxpayers are the descendants of slaves, or came from places affected in West Africa. There would be no justice in who paid. The vast majority of Britons have no connection to slavers’ profits – and nor did their ancestors.
Nor would there be justice in who received. There is no straight line between victims of those times and their descendants. Too much time has passed.
And how much to pay? While I was still Archbishop, on an official visit to the wonderful island of Jamaica, during a panel debate on radio I was seriously told that the right amount was $21trn. I pointed out that was far more than the total wealth of the UK.
Ordinary people from all backgrounds and ethnicities are suffering here at home today. Reparations would amount to a vast fine on the entire British people for a crime they did not commit. You may be able to fine individual people for their conduct, but not everyone for their nationality. Group punishment is a moral evil. It mixes up the guilty and the innocent even when it is about contemporary times, let alone two centuries past.