First Windrush Commissioner vows cultural change, accountability, and action
Reverend Clive Foster is the first person to take up the role, fulfilling a promise by Labour in its manifesto to appoint a Windrush Commissioner.
The post was advertised earlier this year as a three-day week role with an annual salary of £130,000 and for a three-year term.
Mr Foster is a senior pastor at the Pilgrim Church in Nottingham and is the son of parents who migrated to the UK from Jamaica in 1959.
A founder of the Nottingham Windrush Support Forum and vice-chair of the Windrush National Organisation, the Home Office said he brings both lived experience and professional expertise to the role.
He vowed to work constructively with Government but to maintain independence in a role he hopes can bring 'change that the Windrush generations can see and feel in their everyday lives'.
Mr Foster said: 'I'm honoured to take on the role of Windrush Commissioner. I'm committed to ensuring justice is delivered for the Windrush generations – people who have given so much to this country and deserve better than the treatment they have received.
'The injustices they faced must never be repeated, and that requires more than words; it requires cultural change, accountability, and action.
'My aim is to deliver change that the Windrush generations can see and feel in their everyday lives, particularly in how the Windrush Status and Compensation Schemes operate.
'I will carry out this role independently, without fear or favour, while creating a constructive relationship with Government where challenge is welcomed and scrutiny leads to specific, transparent improvements.'
The Windrush scandal – which campaigners have since said should be known as the Home Office scandal – erupted in 2018 when British citizens were wrongly detained, deported or threatened with deportation despite having the right to live in Britain.
Many lost homes and jobs and were denied access to healthcare and benefits.
The compensation scheme set up for victims of the scandal has faced criticism from campaigners and those within the community as complicated and too slow.
Earlier this week Home Office minister Seema Malhotra said around 64 Windrush compensation claimants had died after applying for payouts, as she set out the Government's wish to speed up 'justice'.
She told the House of Commons on Monday that the new commissioner would look at ways to change the compensation scheme.
Ms Malhotra told MPs: 'In opposition, we frequently heard that the application process was too complicated with insufficient support for those wishing to make a claim.
'The Government is determined to ensure that the victims of the Home Office Windrush scandal are heard, that justice is sped up, that the compensation scheme is run efficiently and effectively.'
The Windrush scandal has become known as the Home Office scandal (Kendall Brown/PA)
Mr Foster has been appointed with immediate effect but will begin his formal duties shortly after Windrush Day celebrations on Sunday, the Home Office said.
Home Secretary Yvette Cooper has repeated her insistence that Labour is 'absolutely determined to right the wrongs they suffered at the hands of the Home Office'.
She added: 'This is why I am delighted to welcome Reverend Clive Foster as our new Windrush Commissioner.
'His deep understanding through his own connections and dedicated community work makes him the perfect champion for those affected by this historic injustice.
'I look forward to working closely with Reverend Foster as we continue our vital work to rebuild trust and deliver the justice that the Windrush generations so rightfully deserve.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scottish Sun
33 minutes ago
- Scottish Sun
Keir Starmer calls on Iran to ‘return to negotiating table' as he issues response to US bombing nuclear sites
It comes as Iran has threatened 'everlasting consequences' 'GRAVE THREAT' Keir Starmer calls on Iran to 'return to negotiating table' as he issues response to US bombing nuclear sites SIR Keir Starmer has said the US took action to 'alleviate' Iran's nuclear threat. The Prime Minister urged the Tehran 'to return to the negotiating table and reach a diplomatic solution to end this crisis' as he responded to Trump's blitz. In a statement, the Labour party leader said: "Iran's nuclear programme is a grave threat to international security. "Iran can never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon and the US has taken action to alleviate that threat. "The situation in the Middle East remains volatile and stability in the region is a priority. "We call on Iran to return to the negotiating table and reach a diplomatic solution to end this crisis." This comes after the US military bombed three Iranian nuclear facilities in an historic strike against the Islamic Republic. Iran has since threatened "everlasting consequences" as Houthis vowed to target US forces. In a statement posted on X, Iran's foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi wrote: "The United States, a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, has committed a grave violation of the UN Charter, international law and the NPT by attacking Iran's peaceful nuclear installations. "The events this morning are outrageous and will have everlasting consequences. Each and every member of the UN must be alarmed over this extremely dangerous, lawless and criminal behavior. "In accordance with the UN Charter and its provisions allowing a legitimate response in self-defense, Iran reserves all options to defend its sovereignty, interest, and people." Iran has lashed out with two rounds of missiles into Israel in the wake of America's strikes. The IDF announced about an hour ago that the second wave was on its way, and urged all Israelis to obey the instruction of the Home Front Command. Citizens were also instructed not to share information about locations or casualties. At least 16 people are reported to have been injured. Meanwhile Yemen's Houthi's warned they will target US ships in the Red Sea if they are involved in any potential attack on Iran, the group announced on Saturday. The group's military spokesperson Yahya Saree said: 'We will target US ships and battleships in the Red Sea if Washington participates in the attack on Iran.' Saree added how they consider any potential Israeli attack on Iran to be aimed at 'removing Tehran as an obstacle to an Israeli plan to dominate the region'. In Washington, Trump said the "highly successful" military operation "completely obliterated" Iran's nuclear sites, adding that the US teamed up with Israel to carry out the bombings. The president added that Iran must now make peace or "we will go after" other targets in Iran after the US strikes. Trump said in a nationally televised speech at the White House: "Tonight I can report to the world that the strikes were a spectacular military success. "Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated." But the president also said that if Iran didn't cut a peace deal now it would continue to face American military power. He said: 'Iran, the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace. If they do not, future attacks will be far greater and a lot easier." "There will be either peace or there will be tragedy for Iran far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days." 'Remember there are many targets left. Tonight's was the most difficult of them all, by far, and perhaps the most lethal. 'But if peace does not come quickly we will go after those other targets with precision, speed and skill. 'Most of them can be taken out in a matter of minutes. There's no military in the world that could have done what we did tonight." America has now directly joined Israel's campaign of bombing Iran as they both seek to obliterate Tehran's nuclear program. A response from Iran, or from the Ayatollah in hiding, has not yet come. Ali Khamenei is believed to be cowering away in the secret lair as Israeli missile attacks rain down nearby. Two informed sources inside the country told Iran International the country's ageing dictator is holed up in the bunker in Lavizan, a neighbourhood in Tehran. Posting on Truth Social, President Donald Trump said US bombers targeted Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan enrichment sites - all key to Iran's doomsday project. He said a full payload of BOMBS was dropped on the primary site, Fordow.
Spectator
33 minutes ago
- Spectator
How the ‘experts' got the grooming gang scandal so wrong
At this stage we can't predict what the government's new grooming gangs inquiry will say. But one thing is overwhelmingly likely: many will feel the heat. This includes police who stood back in the face of clear patterns of child sexual exploitation by young Pakistani men to avoid racial tension; social workers desperate not to offend their largely unassimilated Muslim clients; and councillors and politicians who said 'move on, nothing to see here' because of fears that Muslim voters might disown anyone who rocked the multicultural boat. With few exceptions, academics were some of the keenest to suppress discussion about groooming gang abusers' origins or ethnicity Even more interesting, however, is the light all this this has thrown on academia. With few exceptions, academics were some of the keenest to suppress discussion about the abusers' origins or ethnicity. Any reference to this, it was constantly said, risked spreading anti-Muslim racism, distracting attention from more important problems, 'racialising crime', ''othering' South Asian men' and characterising them as 'folk devils'. Paper after paper, seminar after seminar, was devoted to pushing variants on these themes. At first sight this looks odd. Police and social services at least had an incentive to make their jobs easier; so too politicians anxious about their voter base. But academics with no skin in this game? Why should they engage so hard in support of one side? Partly, one suspects, this may be due to the university environment. Ten years ago, a survey found 77 per cent of academics backed Labour, the Lib Dems or the Greens. Only 11 per cent were for the Tories. Today, the figure is possibly even more skewed. This doesn't just mean many academics are instinctively likely to support an approach based on racial identity politics. More seriously, all articles have to be peer reviewed. Peer reviewers within the humanities professoriate are only human. With the best will in the world, one suspects an article trying to minimise the relevance of ethnicity in favour of other factors is likely in practice to get an easier ride. But there is more to it than this. Few admit it, but there is something of a Faustian pact between universities and their state funders and providers of research grants, built on the fiction that in the humanities as much as in traditional sciences the state is investing in cutting-edge advances in knowledge. As a result, today's humanities academics, especially young ones with careers to make or lose, are pressured not only to produce more papers, but also to make their publications 'innovative', and in addition to strive for what is referred to as 'impact', a somewhat protean term that essentially means getting noticed by the great and the good. There are, put bluntly, big brownie points in getting called before a parliamentary committee or quango. The resulting incentive is baneful and perverse. Far from encouraging people to take a sober look at subjects like the sex grooming figures in Rochdale or Oldham and propose low-key, possibly unpalatable, measures to deal with them, the ambitious academic is much better advised to take a different, radical, line – indeed, the more radical the better. Much more attractive to university managers is the construction of new narratives based on theories of the impact of systemic racism or racist media, or on abstract notions of the 'othering' of particular groups. And there is the bonus that if you have radical ideas you're more likely to gain impact by being invited to address that parliamentary committee. This isn't necessarily to criticise the academics concerned. As often as not they have little choice but to promote their increasingly abstract and abtruse theories (many of which are intellectually dodgy owing to their tenuous link with empiricism and regular adoption of incomprehensible and conclusory jargon, but that's another story). But this phenomenon does have one very important result. Fifty years or so ago academics commanded a natural respect. If a professor pronounced on a social problem, with a few exceptions what they said was probably understandable to a layperson, soundly anchored in empiricism, and demonstrative of common sense. This was what made people take notice and take what they said seriously. Today, academics increasingly sound like just another part of the progressive commentariat, albeit with an annoying habit of unashamedly using increasingly esoteric words and, when challenged, insisting that it's not surprising we can't understand their high-powered science. That is their right. But there is also another side to this. If academics go down this road, they have little if any right to respect for their opinionated ramblings, and no particular claim to be listened to by government. We can only hope that the members of the grooming gang inquiry have the good sense to keep this in mind, and treat the earnest pronouncements of the new professoriate with the pointed scepticism they deserve.
Metro
an hour ago
- Metro
Iran nuclear sites 'totally obliterated' in US strikes, Trump announces
Three key Iranian nuclear sites were 'completely and totally obliterated' in a morning attack by US bombers, President Donald Trump has announced. The raid comes just over a week after Israel escalated the conflict in the Middle East with a surprise round of strikes on nuclear and military locations in Iran. Over the past eight days, the two countries have exchanged missile fire, resulting in dozens of deaths – including several top Iranian military officials, as well as civilians. The US has now officially joined Israel in its campaign to end an alleged effort by Iran – denied by its leaders – to acquire a nuclear weapon. In a statement delivered at the White House, Trump thanked Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli military, and 'the great American patriots who flew those magnificant machines'. Flanked by Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, he said: 'Tonight, I can report to the world that the strikes were a spectacular military success. 'Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated.' Iran's state-run IRNA news agency confirmed the Fordo, Isfahan and Natanz nuclear sites had been attacked. More Trending Speculation over a potential US strike on Iran has been building for the past week, with Trump refusing to commit one way or the other. There were questions over whether the US might deploy its 13,500kg 'bunker buster' bomb to penetrate the deepest levels of the Fordo facility. While Trump confirmed B-2 stealth bombers had been involved in the raid, he did not say which type of bombs were used. B-2 bombers are only used by the US military, and they are the only aircraft capable of carrying and delivering the penetrator bomb. Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@ For more stories like this, check our news page. MORE: British man arrested on suspicion of terror offences near vital UK airbase MORE: Neighbour 'killed couple on nudist ranch after being humiliated with a hot dog' MORE: Map shows heat dome set to break centuries-old temperature records across US
