§ 61. Sir B. PETOasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that British subjects whose property in Germany was seized by the German Government have received full compensation, and that British subjects whose property in this country was destroyed by bombs or shell-fire have received on the average only about 35 per cent. of its value; the reason for this discrimination; and whether it is the intention of the Government to make full compensation to the latter category from payments received from Germany on the basis of the Sumner Commission's assessments?
§ Major ELLIOTThe payment of the claims of British nationals on account of exceptional war measures in respect of their property in Germany fall under Part X (Economic Clauses) of the Treaty of Versailles, and were charged upon the proceeds of the liquidation of German property in this country. Claimants in respect of damage by enemy action fall under Part VIII (Reparation Clauses) of the Treaty and have received ex gratia compensation from moniesvoted by Parliament on the scale recommended by the Royal Commission on Suffering and Damage by Enemy Action. It has been repeatedly stated by successive Governments that they cannot ask Parliament to provide further funds at the expense of the general taxpayer to increase the payments already made to such claimants. The sums received from Germany do not, of course, suffice to pay in full all the claims on reparation account.
§ Sir B. PETOWhile thanking the right hon. and gallant Gentleman for the statement he has made, may I ask him to give a specific answer to the question which I put on the paper, namely, whether in the first case the claims of subjects for loss of property in Germany have, in fact, been paid in full; and whether, in the second case, all that British subjects have got for the loss of their property in this country through enemy action amounts to about 35 per cent.?
§ Major ELLIOTYes, Sir. I understand that claims under Part 10 received better treatment than claims under Part 8.
§ Sir B. PETOCan the right hon. and gallant Gentleman say what is the reason for this discrimination between the two categories, other than the fact that he has already stated, that one comes under one part and the other under another part?
§ Major ELLIOTThere were not enough funds to meet in full the claims under Part 8.
§ Sir B. PETOThen, although both had equally good claims, one gets payment on one scale and the other gets payment on another?