Debt was on the front page of the Guardian in October, when it was reported that No.10 could take action on debt as part of a programme of ‘reparatory justice’. So what happened and how have lower-income country governments been pressuring the PM to act?
Sir Keir Starmer has recently attended the Commonwealth leaders meeting in Samoa, where leaders of Commonwealth countries agreed that “the time has come for a meaningful, truthful and respectful conversation” about reparatory justice for the UK’s role in colonialism and the transatlantic slave trade.
The text of the communiqué was embarrassing for the UK government, after Keir Starmer had insisted that the UK would never pay financial reparations and that the issue was not on the agenda.
Starmer argued that the UK would be “facing forwards” in its discussions rather than engaging in long discussions about the past – but calls for reparations have always focused on addressing the ways that colonisation, neo-colonialism and enslavement still shape our world today.
From the late 15th century until the years after World War II, peoples across the world were stripped of their wealth, resources and freedom by European colonisers, who established narrowly export-based economies, producing crops like sugar and cotton, based on their own needs. As a result, countries were left with weak economic bases at independence, and had to turn to loans from their former colonisers and the financial institutions they controlled, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank.
This legacy of colonialism continues today, as countries are forced to cut spending in order to meet IMF conditions and make repayments to wealthy private creditors. In Africa alone, 34 countries are currently spending more on debt payments than on health and education – and lower-income countries globally are spending five times more on debt repayments than fighting the climate crisis.
Reparations are not limited to the financial payments opposed by Starmer. Reparative justice can include financial compensation, but it can also involve psychological, cultural and relationship repair. Reparations can also involve debt cancellation.
The UK government recognised this at the meeting in Samoa, hinting that it could support forms of reparatory justice involving debt relief and addressing the lending of multilateral financial institutions.
Culture secretary Lisa Nandy even referred to the role of the UK as “the legal jurisdiction where many of those debts are settled, [so] we are almost uniquely placed to help them” address the intersecting debt, poverty and climate crises.
The UK’s unique opportunity as the legal jurisdiction for lower-income country debts would be to pass legislation to make private creditors cooperate in debt cancellation, as we and our allies are demanding.
The UK government continues to emphasise that addressing debt is central to its vision for working with lower-income countries – but without committing on the detail, and many of the options discussed amount to more of the same.
However, it is clear that our demands for a debt justice law are cutting through and being heard by ministers. As the pressure for reparations grows, the government will need to set out a clear plan.
This is the time to keep pushing for the UK to commit to a debt justice law. Debt cancellation can never be sufficient to address the legacy of colonial exploitation and injustice, but it would be an important step.
It is vital that we take this opportunity to stand in solidarity with movements around the world demanding reparations, climate justice and an end to ongoing neo-colonial exploitation. Take action now by adding your name to the open letter from Ghanaian campaigner Bernard Anaba demanding a new debt justice law in the UK.