Displaying Egyptian mummies is ‘morally wrong and should be illegal'
The All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) for Afrikan Reparations has claimed that displaying Egyptian mummies is 'unethical' and disrespects 'wishes of the ancestors'.
The group, chaired by Bell Ribeiro-Addy, a Labour MP, has called for legal changes to make popular displays of ancient mummified remains 'an offence'.
MPs argued in a report called Laying the Ancestors to Rest that changes should be made to the Human Tissue Act 2004, which regulates the storage and display of remains.
The report states that mummies were acquired under 'colonial regimes of exploitation' and that the image of 'the mummy' offers 'exoticised mystique for the Western audience'.
It adds that mummies became 'object of racist pseudoscientific research, including in efforts to evidence that Egyptians were white Europeans'.
Many African academics have attempted to argue that ancient Egyptians were black, a common belief in Afrocentric circles.
Mummies are displayed in museums around the world, including in South Africa and Egypt itself.
MPs in the APPG have, however, called on the UK government to prevent the sale of human remains, and to facilitate their return from museum collections to their countries of origin.
Human remains are held by major institutions including the British Museum, the Natural History Museum and the museum attached to units including Oxford.
Examples include Australian Aboriginal and Native American remains, South American shrunken heads, and bog bodies unearthed in the UK.
During the 19th century, human remains were collected from around the world for scientific and anthropological research, often to provide objects of study in the discredited field of phrenology.
A policy of returning human remains will assist the African diaspora in 'healing from the traumas of enslavement and colonial violence', the report has claimed.
In a foreword to the report, Ms Ribeiro-Addy wrote that the new recommendations address 'the ethical, cultural and historical concerns surrounding African ancestral remains – many of which were taken during colonial rule'.
She added: 'The continued presence of these remains in British institutions causes profound distress to diaspora communities and countries of origin, particularly when they are displayed or sold at auction.'
The report notes that the display of human remains has become increasingly contentious in the 'context of ongoing debates about restitution and reparations '.
Ms Ribeiro-Addy has long called for the UK to pay slavery reparations and in February spoke in Parliament to urge the Government to 'play a constructive role in addressing our country's legacy of slavery and colonialism'.
The APPG for Afrikan Reparations also includes Clive Lewis, a Labour MP who has called for payments to be made to Caribbean nations, and Dianne Abbott, who last year called on Sir Keir Starmer to take action on the issue of reparations.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
30 minutes ago
- Spectator
Has Labour abandoned the steel industry?
We will no doubt hear lots of familiar excuses if later this week, as seems increasingly likely, the British steel industry faces 50 per cent tariffs on its exports to the United States. There hasn't been enough time. The White House has been too busy, and so has the Prime Minister. The trouble is, none of them make sense. And so when these tariffs kick in, the Labour government, which we might expect to defend a traditional heavy industry, will have abandoned steel to its fate. When the 9 July deadline for the suspension of President Trump's tariffs expires, we can expect chaos in the global trading system. The EU's over-confident and arrogant negotiators have failed to reach a deal, leaving every exporter in the bloc facing huge tariffs from Thursday onwards. Amid all that, it might be easy to miss a small but still significant problem. The suspension of full tariffs on British-made steel will also come to an end, and, without an agreement, the industry will also face huge levies. This could be catastrophic for the industry. 'Every day of delay costs our steelmakers dearly,' argued UK Steel, the trade body for the industry. 'Contracts slip away, investment plans stall and uncertainty freezes business decisions'. It could hardly come at a worse time. The industry has already been hit by a barrage of green levies and targets. It has to face some of the highest industrial electricity prices in the world. The Budget last year imposed higher National Insurance charges on every person it employs. The list goes on and on. British Steel has already been taken under emergency control by the government after its Chinese owners gave up on it, and with 50 per cent tariffs the rest of the industry may give up as well. And yet, despite that, the government has not had the energy or commitment to negotiate an exemption for the UK, even though other exporters will face just 10 per cent tariffs in the US. There is a bigger point than just steel. The UK's industrial base is being wiped out, with almost every week bringing news of yet another closure. Last week it was the Prax Lindsey oil refinery and in the week before, Nippon Electric Glass announced the closure of the UK's largest fibreglass factory. Starmer's Labour government should be defending the interests of the people who worked in these kinds of jobs. Instead, it is complacently allowing the steel industry to be wiped out – and doesn't appear to care much about any other manufacturers either.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
My open letter to Rachel Reeves to avoid the disasters killing racing
Dear Rachel, We need to talk about growth, through the prism of the horse racing industry. We need to talk about mistakes that you have inherited that are not being addressed and we need to talk about the consequences of the tax raid that the Treasury is currently 'consulting' about. The horse racing industry provides more than £4 billion to the economy every year. It employs more than 80,000 people, supports 6,000 small businesses and is the lifeblood of more than 40 Labour constituencies. It also supports a 'soft' trade network, which is the envy of many of our competing nations, with many foreign investors attracted to the UK because of racing. That network could be relocated very easily if the standard and regard in which our racing is held should diminish. But so dire are the consequences of the situation, the prediction is that foal production will fall by 40 per cent in this country under this government. Subsequently, there will be a similar contraction of the second-biggest sport in this country, and all the employment and tax receipts that go with it. If it is ideology rather than growth that is your master, these may be losses that do not concern you. But I will spell out the three main causes anyway. Firstly, let's consider your consultation on harmonisation of online gambling taxes. Sounds innocuous enough to the uninformed, but the reality is such a harmonisation fails to take into account the social impact of different types of gambling. Online casino and slots games provide little employment in this country, are designed to be addictive and cause a huge amount of social harm. So, I would suggest you double the tax on them to 42 per cent. Betting tax on racing, which is no more addictive than buying a Lottery ticket, is 15 per cent. The smart thing to do would be to reduce this using the gains from casino games to offset the shortfall, if you really want to create growth. Increasing the tax on racing, on the other hand, would be an act of moral and fiscal vandalism that would reduce your tax take before the end of this parliament. The bookmakers realise that their best defence of casino-games taxation is to tie it as closely as possible to racing. Do not fall for that argument. They can, and should, be treated differently. Secondly, there is the matter of the Levy review which has been swept under the carpet and ignored since the election. Bookmakers pay a levy back to UK racing on bets struck on races run on home soil. But they do not pay that levy on betting on foreign racing. In Donald Trump's world, that is akin to having a tariff on a home-grown product but making the same imported product tariff free. How can that be growth friendly? When the Levy was originally constructed, bets taken on foreign racing would have been negligible. But in part due to support they have had from successive governments, the strength of breeding and racing horses in Ireland has superseded the UK. When Gordon Brown was Prime Minister, he asked me how this could be corrected. Apparently, even he knew the results at the Cheltenham Festival. But such is the strength of the bookmakers' lobbying, nothing was done to correct this Levy anomaly, which now costs the industry in the UK circa £25 million per annum. The third disaster killing racing is the ill-conceived affordability checks that have been nurtured by a Gambling Commission that is driving punters into the welcoming arms of the illegal bookmakers. The Gambling Commission is meant to be protecting punters from losses they cannot afford and bookmakers who do not follow guidelines of acceptable practice. But the reality is, if the regulated market becomes too onerous, punters will desert it for the black market, costing the Treasury hundreds of millions of pounds. The fact that the black market has grown exponentially in the past few years is indicative that the Gambling Commission is a misguided, failing quango. If you want to save money, I suggest you get rid of it. I suspect there may be some mitigating circumstances as to why you are possibly unaware of these issues and their consequences. Racing should have built closer relationships with the Cabinet Office and been more proactive highlighting the threat of the betting black market. It suited the Gambling Commission's agenda to downplay this leakage and racing should have been less nervous about confronting them and bringing it to your attention. I hope this gives you food for thought. Yours, Charlie Brooks
Daily Mirror
an hour ago
- Daily Mirror
UK workers to get £29,000 pension boost under new retirement rules
Small pension pots worth £1,000 or less would be consolidated into larger schemes under the new Pension Schemes Bill, which returns to Parliament for its second reading today Pension savers could get a boost of up to £29,000 by the time they retire thanks to major new legislation, according to Government figures. Small pension pots worth £1,000 or less would be consolidated into larger schemes under the new Pension Schemes Bill, which returns to Parliament for its second reading today. As well as creating better opportunity for growth, Labour says this would help solve the issue of people losing track of multiple small pension pots. You can end up with lots of small pots if you change jobs regularly, or if you've changed address and you didn't update your pension provider with your details. Labour estimates that working people on an average salary who save into a pension pot over their career could get up to £29,000 extra by the time they retire. It is thought 20 million pension savers would benefit. In future, pension schemes will also need to prove they are value for money and help savers understand whether their scheme is giving them good returns. Another measure included the bill is a plan to move billions of pounds of pension savings into larger "megafunds". This is where smaller local authority and private workplace schemes are consolidated together, in the hope that larger funds will generate greater returns. There are similar schemes that run in Australia and Canada. Minister for Pensions, Torsten Bell said: 'We're ramping up the pace of pension reform, to ensure that people's pension savings works as hard for them as they worked to save. 'The measures in our Pension Schemes Bill will drive costs down and returns up on workers' retirement savings – putting more money in people's pockets to the tune of up to £29,000 for an average earner and delivering on our Plan for Change.' Minister for Local Government and English Devolution, Jim McMahon OBE said: 'This Bill will ensure the Local Government Pension Scheme is fit for the future and harness its full potential, with assets due to reach £1 trillion by 2040, and will strengthen investment in local communities to accelerate growth as part of our Plan for Change.' Zoe Alexander, Director of Policy and Advocacy for Pensions and Lifetime Savings Association: 'The introduction of the Pension Schemes Bill is a significant milestone, bringing forward necessary legislation to enact important reforms that have the full backing of the pensions industry. 'This includes small pots consolidation, the Value for Money regime, decumulation options and changes to give DB funds more options for securing member benefits over the long-term. 'Once fully implemented, these measures should reduce the cost of administering pensions, remove complexity for savers and help ensure schemes are maximising the value they provide members.'
