[Ammi]

Labour MPs have backed calls from campaigners for a Tory MP to repay the money his family made from slave plantations in the Caribbean.

Ancestors of South Dorset MP Richard Drax ran plantations in Jamaica and Barbados between 1640 and 1836, according to the Sunday Mirror.

Drax Hall's sugar plantation in Saint George, Barbados, had a workforce of around 327 enslaved people for nearly 200 years.

The Tory MP still owns the establishment, which is now run as a farm, having inherited it from his father in 2017.

Now CARICOM, a conglomerate of Caribbean nations, has called on Drax to pay reparations to the people of Barbados and Jamaica.

They are asking for a sum of £4.7 million, the equivalent value of the estate when he inherited it, and have gained the support of some Labour MPs in the UK.

Read more: Deportation flight to Jamaica departs without 37 of the 50 passengers due to fly

Former shadow home secretary Diane Abbott tweeted: “So Tory MP Richard Drax family made huge fortune from slavery. Money soaked in blood.

“More than 30,000 slaves died on the Drax plantations in Barbados and Jamaica over 200 years #BlackLivesMatter.”

While fellow Labour MP Marsha de Cordova said: “His family made a fortune from their Caribbean plantations where tens of thousands died.”

Drax, however, defended his ownership of the farm, saying he cannot be held responsible “for what happened many hundreds of years ago”.

“I am keenly aware of the slave trade in the West Indies, and the role my very distant ancestor played in it is deeply, deeply regrettable,” he said.

“But no one can be held responsible today for what happened many hundreds of years ago. This is a part of the nation’s history, from which we must all learn.”

Sir Hilary Beckles, chair of the CARICOM Reparations Commission, said: “Black life mattered only to make millionaires of English enslavers and the Drax family did it longer than any other elite family.

“When I drive through Drax Hall land I feel a sense of being in a massive killing field with unmarked cemeteries. Sugar and Black Death went hand in glove.

“It's no answer for Richard Drax to say it has nothing to do with him when he is the owner and inheritor. They should pay reparations.”

https://uk.yahoo.com/news/richard-dr...155051416.html

[Alf]

Those Labour MPs need to go and listen to some Thomas Sowell.

[Crimson Dynamo]

labour becoming even more irrelevant shock

[joeysteele]

I don't know how I feel that some Labour MPs, NOT Labour overall are calling for support for this.

On balance I'd agree it's unsavoury no matter the past time it occurred.

I'd have thought anyone really decent with it's history would have dropped this plantation and wouldn't want anything to do with it.

Probably says more about Drax than anyone else.
It's not just deeply regrettable as he'd describe it.
It was obscenely wrong.
As in all atrocities against other Human beings.
No matter how he may wish to ' dress ' it up.

[arista]

Yes Drax can afford it

[bots]

laws are never applied retrospectively, therefore the money was earned legally at the time

[Niamh.]

It should be taken back from him imo

[The Slim Reaper]

Not really sure it's right to take money from him now, unless it's part of some greater effort to finally pay full and comprehensive reparations. I think the royal family need to be first on the list to start handing money back.

[joeysteele]

It would be nice by way if some acknowledgement of that sinister dark past, that he just decided to offer it.

It should never have been even seen as being, let alone be legal to have profited on the losses of others lives.

[Kizzy]

There have been calls for reparation, which is effectively the taxpayer paying, they have already since abolition paid the slave owners imo a disgusting act of appeasement that is one of the most shameful periods in our history.

It is morally the duty of the decendent of the recipient of 'compensation' to repay any monies but as seen that's not very likely.

To my mind too the monies should go to the decendent of said slaves not another government.

[bots]

no-one is held responsible for their fathers sins, and it wasnt illegal at the time

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

no-one is held responsible for their fathers sins, and it wasnt illegal at the time

I didn't mention 'sins' .... and the legality isn't the issue.

The issue is the government money (taxpayers) that was used to pay slave owners to part with them. This put the country into massive debt and took untill 2015 to pay off.

If there are any reparations my opinion is it is the MORAL obligation of the recipient of that inheritance to pay not present and future tax payers.

[bots]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

I didn't mention 'sins' .... and the legality isn't the issue.

The issue is the government money (taxpayers) that was used to pay slave owners to part with them. This put the country into massive debt and took untill 2015 to pay off.

If there are any reparations my opinion is it is the MORAL obligation of the recipient of that inheritance to pay not present and future tax payers.

the point is there is no obligation to pay back anything and all it is, is more virtue signalling

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

the point is there is no obligation to pay back anything and all it is, is more virtue signalling

I differ from Kizzy slightly in that we vote for politicians and give them the power to spend our money, otherwise I'd want our £200b for brexit back, but wanting justice for our nations part in slavery isn't virtue signalling. It just seems like every call for justice and fairness that tories don't like, is automatically dismissed as such.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

the point is there is no obligation to pay back anything and all it is, is more virtue signalling

Of course there isn't an obligation.. that's why I stated it was a moral obligation only.

What would be 'virtue signalling'?... if you are going to use nonsense words give a vague description of what you're attempting to say.

For example...recently the business rate relief was handed back by many supermarkets to ease the pressure on taxpayers and also due to the present tax profits made this year... is this virtue signalling, or just business doing the right thing for the country?

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

I differ from Kizzy slightly in that we vote for politicians and give them the power to spend our money, otherwise I'd want our £200b for brexit back, but wanting justice for our nations part in slavery isn't virtue signalling. It just seems like every call for justice and fairness that tories don't like, is automatically dismissed as such.

Wait... Brexit was our idea not governments there was a referendum remember? Bad example

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Wait... Brexit was our idea not governments there was a referendum remember? Bad example

My bad, but if we do want to touch on virtue signalling, we should remember that Farage attended 1 out of 43 fisheries meetings during his time as an MEP.

[Tom4784]

No amount of time can change the fact that his family's fortune was built upon slavery, especially considering they're still profiting from the land. Chances are that reparations would likely be a pittance to him considering he is old money so to see him deny reparations is just vile.

[thesheriff443]

You could say his ancestors were responsible for slave deaths they didn’t serve a prison sentence but you can.

Laughable at best.

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

You could say his ancestors were responsible for slave deaths they didn’t serve a prison sentence but you can.

Laughable at best.

Not really the same. Death doesn't cancel debt unless there isn't any money. In this case there is loads of it.

[arista]

A Prof was just on Times Radio DAB /Online
saying Drax needs to giveback , that big house on the Island.

Drax is saying its a long time ago

[Oliver_W]

Bit stupid really. One doesn't inherit the sins of the father, let alone the great-great-great-whatever-grandfather. What happened in the past is nothing to do with him, so he shouldn't have to pay for it.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

Bit stupid really. One doesn't inherit the sins of the father, let alone the great-great-great-whatever-grandfather. What happened in the past is nothing to do with him, so he shouldn't have to pay for it.

Is he really paying for it though when it's something that was inherited? It's not like he worked really hard to pay for the place out of his own money. It should be given back to the Island it was taken from

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

It should be given back to the Island it was taken from

Why? That's like saying when someone dies their house should be given to the state rather than their descendants.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Oliver_W

Why? That's like saying when someone dies their house should be given to the state rather than their descendants.

Clearly this is a different situation to normal inheritance considering the history of the house/"business" and the fact it was in a foreign country where the natives were exploited. That **** should never have happened and assets should be returned as stolen property, same way Museums should return artifacts they took from foreign countries