The White Man's Bone-den?
Natural History Museum returns human remains collected as 'curios' by C19 explorers and missionaries.
And fair enough, surely? Or not:
Dr Tiffany Jenkins, of the Institute of Ideas, believes that museums are acting out of a sense of post-colonial guilt: "This is meant to make reparations for all sorts of past wrongs," she told BBC News.
"But do giving human remains back really do that and do they not distract us from the very real material problems faced by the islanders?"
Dr Jenkins also argues that religion and religious beliefs should not "trump" the research that could be done on these remains.
"(The research) could tell us all sorts of things about past people which is something that belongs to everybody: you, me and the Torres Straits people."
The article doesn't seem to explain why making "reparations" and being aware of present "material problems" should be mutually exclusive, or why these particular cultures should bear the burden of scientific research. It's not as if they were given or, indeed, acquired for scientific purposes. Granted, there is a lot to learn from material like this (though it's not obvious that a lot is actually being learned from the material in this case, the 'vast majority' of which is 'kept in storage and not used for research). But If we're set on valuing the scientific utility of human remains over their "immaterial" - their sentimental, or , dare I say, "cultural", value - we need not worry about the present loss to science of a few aboriginal specimens from a couple of hundred years ago. Why, there are stone boxes of equally ancient remains in public buildings all over Britain: just think what they could teach science about rich white people from a similar period.
...sure, there's a general case to be made for scientific value vs sentiment / superstition, but if I was the sort of academic asked for comment here, I think I'd probably have let this soapbox pass me by...