The distinction between “deep sorrow” and an apology is not linguistic pedantry. It is a carefully constructed legal firewall. Governments employ teams of lawyers specifically to ensure that the language used in official statements cannot be construed as admissions of legal liability. “Deep sorrow” expresses an emotional state. An apology accepts responsibility. The difference, in law, can be the difference between nothing and a claim of enormous financial magnitude.
The result is statements that are legally cautious but morally empty. They satisfy no one. Reparations advocates point out correctly that “deep sorrow” is not an apology and commits Britain to nothing. Critics of the reparations campaign point out correctly that the language implies some form of guilt without having the honesty to say what Britain’s actual position is. Everyone is right to be dissatisfied, and the government has produced the worst outcome: it looks weak without being honest.
