Andy Burnham has said he is ‘open’ to calls for Britain to issue a formal apology for its role in the slave trade, but ruled out offering financial reparations. The Prime Minister is set to attend the Commonwealth heads of government meeting (Chogm) in the Caribbean next week, and ahead of his visit has expressed his “sorrow and regret” for the suffering caused by the transatlantic slave trade.

He said he wanted to deliver a “structured dialogue” with those impacted.

Burnham said in The Guardian: “Having these difficult conversations to safeguard the Commonwealth for the future is the right thing to do. It is also the patriotic thing to do. Not just because it is in our interests, but because the Britain I believe in is confident, decent and brave. We led the world in abolishing slavery – and we can show leadership again today.”

Burnham labelled the trade a “brutal and barbaric violation” of people “treated as property and worked to their deaths”. He wrote: “I want to express my sorrow and regret for the pain and suffering of so many millions and to recognise the way it still shapes our world today.”

The comments come as Caribbean nations have made fresh calls for Britain to apologise for its role in slavery, as the King visited the region.

Burnham said: “We are offering a structured dialogue with those affected by the transatlantic slave trade. Listening to calls for a formal apology on behalf of the British state will form an important part of this process and I am open to them.”

In keeping with the policy of his predecessors, he stopped short of offering any consideration of reparation payments.

He said: “Some have called for financial reparations for the slave trade. I do not believe that is the right answer. 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 said he would instead seek to launch a drive on debt-servicing to help countries repay over a longer time period with better rates.

Chancellor John Healey, Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband and former prime minister Gordon Brown will join him at the summit to help with this work, he said.

He said the UK will also support countries with the transition to renewable energy and getting smaller countries heard on the world stage, as well as with work to educate women and girls and tackle poverty and inequality.

Denis O’Brien, founder of The Repair Campaign, which describes itself as a transatlantic movement for reparatory justice for the Caribbean, said: “The British Government must stop obfuscating and give a full and formal apology now. This would be a significant and symbolic first step towards reparatory justice.

“Tonight’s statement from the Prime Minister was disappointing, and will not quell the demand for an apology from the 15 Caricom countries in advance of the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Antigua next week.”

Ahead of Burnham’s arrival, the King has been officially welcomed to Antigua and Barbuda by the Governor-General Sir Rodney Williams after flying in from Guyana to VC Bird International Airport. As Charles arrived, the national anthems of the UK and Antigua and Barbuda were played by the Antigua and Barbuda Royal Police Band.

The King then spoke to a few officers as he went to meet Minister of Foreign Affairs and Chair of the CHOGM 2026 Task Force, Chet Greene; Minister of Tourism, Civil Aviation, Transportation, and Investment, Charles Fernandez; Chief of Defence Staff, Brigadier General Telbert Benjamin; and Commissioner of Police of the Royal Police Force of Antigua and Barbuda, Everton Jeffers.

Andy Burnham ‘Open’ to Calls for Britain to Formally Apologise for Slavery

The question of whether Britain should formally apologise for its historical involvement in the transatlantic slave trade has once again become a major political and diplomatic issue. British Prime Minister Andy Burnham has recently stated that he is open to calls for an official apology on behalf of the British state, acknowledging the suffering inflicted on millions of enslaved Africans and the continuing consequences of slavery. His comments represent an important development in Britain’s approach to one of the darkest chapters of its history. However, while Burnham has expressed sorrow and regret, he has firmly rejected demands for financial reparations. His position has therefore reopened a complex debate about historical responsibility, justice, national identity and the obligations of modern governments towards communities affected by past injustices.

To understand the significance of Burnham’s statement, it is necessary to examine Britain’s historical role in the slave trade. During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, Britain became one of the leading participants in the transatlantic slave trade. British ships transported millions of African men, women and children across the Atlantic Ocean to work under brutal conditions in the Caribbean and the Americas. Enslaved people were forced to labour on sugar, tobacco and cotton plantations, generating enormous wealth for British merchants, plantation owners and financial institutions. The economic benefits of slavery contributed to the development of British commerce and industry, while the people responsible for producing this wealth were denied freedom, dignity and basic human rights.

The human consequences were devastating. Families were separated, communities were destroyed and generations of Africans experienced violence, exploitation and discrimination. Enslaved people were treated as property rather than human beings, and their lives were controlled by systems designed to maximise economic profit. Even after slavery was abolished, many former slaves continued to experience poverty, racial discrimination and limited access to education and economic opportunities. These historical experiences have shaped the social and economic development of many Caribbean countries and remain an important part of their collective memory.

Britain abolished the slave trade in 1807 and slavery throughout most of its colonies through the Slavery Abolition Act of 1833, which took effect in 1834. The British government also played a role in suppressing the international slave trade through naval operations. These achievements are an important part of British history and should not be overlooked. Nevertheless, the abolition of slavery did not automatically compensate those who had suffered from centuries of exploitation. In fact, the British government paid approximately £20 million in compensation to former slave owners following abolition, while the formerly enslaved received no equivalent financial compensation. This historical fact remains central to contemporary arguments about reparations.

In his recent intervention, Burnham has attempted to address this historical legacy while maintaining a distinction between acknowledging past wrongdoing and accepting financial responsibility for it. Writing ahead of the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Antigua and Barbuda, he expressed his personal sorrow and regret for the pain and suffering experienced by millions of enslaved Africans. He described the transatlantic slave trade as a brutal and barbaric violation of human dignity and recognised that its consequences continue to shape the modern world.

More significantly, Burnham said that listening to calls for a formal apology on behalf of the British state would form an important part of a structured dialogue with affected communities and countries. He declared that he was open to such calls. This is politically significant because it indicates a greater willingness to discuss an official apology than previous British governments had demonstrated. Rather than dismissing the issue, Burnham has suggested that Britain should engage directly with Caribbean nations and organisations representing the descendants of enslaved people.

However, Burnham has drawn a clear line regarding financial reparations. He argued that British citizens living today should not be held liable for historical wrongs committed in a different period, under different laws, by people in whose actions they played no personal part. In his view, financial compensation is not the appropriate solution. Instead, he has proposed practical cooperation, particularly through an initiative to help vulnerable Commonwealth countries restructure their debts and obtain more favourable repayment conditions.

This proposal reflects an attempt to move the debate towards economic cooperation and development. Many Caribbean countries face serious financial challenges, including high public debt, climate vulnerability and limited resources for healthcare and education. Some governments spend substantial proportions of their national budgets servicing debt rather than investing in essential public services. Helping these countries obtain longer repayment periods and better interest rates could provide additional financial flexibility. Burnham has also highlighted cooperation in renewable energy, education, poverty reduction and international representation as areas where Britain could provide meaningful support.

Nevertheless, Caribbean leaders have made it clear that debt restructuring cannot automatically replace reparations. For many campaigners, reparatory justice involves more than financial compensation. It includes official recognition, historical truth, institutional reform, educational investment and measures to address inequalities that developed during and after slavery. From their perspective, a formal apology is an important first step towards acknowledging the suffering of their ancestors and establishing a more honest relationship with Britain.

The response from Caribbean political leaders has therefore been cautiously positive. Barbados Prime Minister Mia Mottley welcomed Burnham’s acknowledgement of the brutality of slavery and his willingness to consider an official apology. However, she also emphasised that disagreement over reparations should not prevent cooperation in areas such as healthcare, education, poverty reduction and debt reform. Similarly, Antigua and Barbuda’s Prime Minister Gaston Browne welcomed the proposal for dialogue and practical economic assistance while maintaining that the Caribbean’s position on reparatory justice had not changed.

These responses demonstrate that Caribbean governments are not necessarily rejecting practical cooperation simply because Britain refuses to promise financial compensation. Rather, they want the historical issue to be addressed through meaningful discussions that recognise the long-term consequences of slavery. For them, the central concern is not simply obtaining money but ensuring that historical injustice is acknowledged and that its continuing effects are taken seriously.

Within Britain, however, the issue remains politically controversial. Critics of an official apology argue that present-day taxpayers should not be made responsible for actions committed centuries ago. They also point out that Britain eventually abolished slavery and spent considerable resources suppressing the international slave trade. Nigel Farage, for example, has argued that Britain has already paid the price for its historical involvement in slavery. Other political figures have questioned whether another apology would achieve anything meaningful, particularly when Britain is facing serious domestic challenges involving public finances, healthcare, housing and the cost of living.

On the other hand, supporters of an apology argue that acknowledging historical wrongdoing does not mean assigning personal guilt to every British citizen. A formal apology is an act of institutional recognition, not necessarily an admission that individuals living today personally committed historical crimes. Modern governments regularly acknowledge mistakes made by previous administrations because national institutions have continuity across generations. From this perspective, refusing to acknowledge historical suffering may damage international relationships and weaken Britain’s credibility when it speaks about human rights and equality.

In my opinion, Britain’s approach should be based on historical honesty and constructive international cooperation. It is reasonable to distinguish between personal responsibility and the responsibility of national institutions. British citizens today cannot be individually blamed for slavery, but the British state can acknowledge the role played by its historical institutions in supporting and benefiting from the slave trade. Such recognition would not diminish Britain’s achievements in abolishing slavery. Instead, it would demonstrate an ability to examine national history in a balanced and mature way.

Furthermore, a formal apology should not become an empty political gesture. If Britain decides to apologise, that decision should be accompanied by practical measures that improve the lives of communities affected by historical exploitation. Investment in education, healthcare, climate resilience and economic development could create lasting benefits. Debt restructuring may also be useful, provided that it is designed in consultation with the countries concerned and responds to their actual economic needs.

Equally important, both British and Caribbean political leaders should avoid allowing historical disagreements to undermine future cooperation. The Commonwealth brings together countries with different histories, economic circumstances and political priorities. Open dialogue could help rebuild trust and develop a more equal relationship between Britain and its former colonies. Such cooperation should be based on mutual respect rather than political pressure or historical defensiveness.

In conclusion, Andy Burnham’s willingness to consider a formal British apology for slavery represents a significant moment in the continuing debate over Britain’s historical responsibilities. His expression of sorrow and regret acknowledges the immense human suffering caused by the transatlantic slave trade, while his rejection of financial reparations demonstrates the limits of his government’s current position. Caribbean leaders have welcomed the willingness to engage but continue to demand broader forms of reparatory justice. Ultimately, the challenge is to find a constructive balance between historical recognition and contemporary responsibilities. Britain cannot change its past, but it can decide how honestly it confronts that past and how positively it contributes to the future. A meaningful apology, combined with practical cooperation and respect for affected communities, could provide an opportunity to build stronger and more equitable international relationships.