HC Deb 11 February 1949 vol 461 cc746-56

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."—[Mr. Snow.]

4.1 p.m.

Mr. Royle (Salford, West)

I am very much obliged to the Secretary of State for War for coming down to the House at this late hour on a Friday to reply to a Debate on the Motion for the Adjournment. I want to say that the subject I have to raise is one of a very unpleasant character and one that is not easy to discuss, even within the precincts of this House. It is a matter which has given me a great deal of concern, and I am quite certain that other hon. Members are in the same position.

I refer to the question of the repatriation of soldiers' bodies from different parts of the world, and particularly Germany, where soldiers may happen to die from natural causes, or, alternatively, by accident. Of course, I am referring only to circumstances which have arisen since the end of the war, and in no way to the deaths of soldiers in the course of their war activities. My attention was first drawn to this matter of repatriation and its expense by a constituency case, and in the few minutes at my disposal I hope to mention that particular case. In the meantime, very many letters have come to me from all parts of the country because of the association of my name with that case.

The War Office has ordained that, in the event of a soldier dying, in particular in Germany, or being killed in some accident, the parents have the right to bring the body of their son back to England. They have laid that down as something which can be done, provided that the parents take the financial responsibility of bringing the body from the port on the Continent to the home town. Let me say in fairness to my right hon. Friend and the War Office that the advice of the War Office always is that the interment should take place at a cemetery near to the place of death, and I want to say without hesitation that I believe the advice of the War Office is correct. I believe that it is wise, and I think that, if I were in such distressing circumstances myself, I should realise that that advice was the proper advice.

But it is a very difficult matter to know precisely what the reactions of a mother may be when her son dies or is killed abroad. It may easily be, in many cases, that the mother's immediate reaction is that she must have her son brought home and buried in their own town. If that reaction does occur, the War Office should meet it with every sympathy and every assistance. Those are terrible times for parents. In time of war there is a sort of grim expectancy on the part of parents that something may happen, but in peace-time when their sons are abroad they assume that there is comparative safety, and, therefore, death abroad in peace-time conditions comes as a much greater shock. The War Office ought to give consideration to that point.

My first submission is that my right hon. Friend should undertake the financial responsibility when parents elect to bring the bodies of their sons home from Germany. At the moment the War Office allows £5 towards the expenses; the unit provides the coffin, and in most cases the unit sends the body to the port on the Continent from whence it comes to this country. From that point it becomes the parents' responsibility. In the case in my constituency an agency called the Continental Express Company made a charge of £73 1s. 7d. to bring the body of a boy from the Hook of Holland to Salford. That is a tremendous expense which parents should not be expected to bear, particularly when in addition they have the expenses of the local undertaker, the burial ground and the like.

The father of the family I have in mind is a soldier of both wars. He is suffering from some disability, and he experiences periods of unemployment on account of them. His son was killed by his own pal in a shooting accident, and great concern is felt in the home. The mother is in a state of collapse because of the debts facing them, over and above her son's death. A country like ours should not expect parents, who may have made a mistake in what they have elected to do, to undertake such a tremendous liability.

I heard of a case at Buxton which is the same distance from the Hook of Holland as Salford, and in that case the charge was £60. The only difference that I can discover is that the boys of the 11th Hussars sent wreaths with the coffin in my constituency case, and the carriage of those wreaths was charged for. I heard of another case of a boy dying in Cairo, and it cost £300 to bring the body to London.

My second submission is that if it is impossible for the War Office to bear the expense of the agencies, then there are aircraft, ships, trains and lorries working between England and our zone in Germany, and I feel they might be used for this grim task. Alternatively, there should be an arrangement between the War Office and the agencies to ensure that the price which is charged is reasonable and one which the parents under any circumstances can afford to bear. The charges at the moment are excessive, particularly at a time when the parents are in the depths of the greatest misery of their lives, and it is an awful thing to ask them to bear such expenses in the circumstances.

I have tried not to make an impassioned speech, and I have also tried to confine it to within as short a time as possible so that the matter may be dealt with adequately. I have tried to make a factual statement coupled with a very sincere appeal to my right hon. Friend to see that the whole matter is reviewed so that this intolerable burden on parents whose son has been killed may be transferred to what would be a negligible charge on the State as a whole. I hope my right hon. Friend will give very sympathetic consideration to the matter.

4.10 p.m.

Major Legge-Bourke (Isle of Ely)

I am sure that all of us here sympathise with the hon. Member for West Salford (Mr. Royle) in the character of the subject he has raised. It is certainly one which it is extremely difficult to talk about without becoming impassioned and I think he should be congratulated on the way he has put his case.

I want to ask the Secretary of State if, as well as answering the very important points which have been put to him by the hon. Member for West Salford, he will also take this opportunity to tell us what is now the situation between the War Office and the Imperial War Graves Commission? The right hon. Gentleman will remember that there was a case in which the son of one of my constituents was killed in Palestine and where the father was ready to bring the body back by air at his own expense, but the right hon. Gentleman had arranged with the Imperial War Graves Commission that the body of that boy should be buried in Palestine in one of the War Graves Commission's cemeteries. The War Graves Commission had a rule at that time that no disinterment could be allowed once the body had been accepted in the War Graves Commission's cemetery.

I am not attempting to criticise the Imperial War Graves Commission. I know their cemeteries are as near as possible to being what relatives would like them to be, but at the same time it seems to me that where people desire to have their relatives' bodies brought home and are prepared to pay for the transport they should be allowed to do so. I wonder whether the Secretary of State has anything to tell us about the relationship in this matter between the War Office and the Imperial War Graves Commission.

4.12 p.m.

Miss Colman (Tynemouth)

I want to speak for only two or three minutes, but I want to support the plea made by my hon. Friend the Member for West Salford (Mr. Royle). I hope when the Secretary of State for War replies he will deal with this problem as it relates to every country in which soldiers may die and not only with the British zone of Germany, to which my hon. Friend particularly referred.

I am quite sure it would not be desired in every case that the body of a soldier should be brought home. Perhaps it would not be desired in the majority of cases. I feel very strongly, however, that where the parents desire that it should be so, some help should be given to them. One may take the view, as my hon. Friend did, that it would be wiser that the body should not be brought home, but in this matter one has to put oneself in the position of the parents and to recognise and appreciate what they are feeling at a time like this. The problem was brought home very forcibly to me by a case in my own constituency where the parents were told that the cost of bringing their son's body from Egypt to the port in this country, only to the port, would be £250. I hope it will be possible for my right hon. Friend to make some concession in this very human problem.

4.14 p.m.

The Secretary of State for War (Mr. Shinwell)

The House may rest assured that I am as anxious as any hon. Member to relieve bereaved parents, but this is a problem which it is not easy to resolve. My hon. Friend the Member for West Salford (Mr. Royle) rightly said that this matter does not relate to bodies of men killed in the war itself. This is a post-war matter which relates to men who have been killed or have died through one cause or another since the end of the war.

All along we have discouraged the bringing of bodies home to this country. We have thought it desirable, as in the case of war bodies, that interment should take place in the country where the death occurred. It is an undoubted fact, quite beyond dispute, that generally speaking, unless there are physical difficulties which render it otherwise, the activities of the Imperial War Graves Commission have on the whole satisfied bereaved parents and relatives that bodies ought not to be brought home to this country. Their graves are beautifully tended and the cemeteries very well kept. Moreover, we have to take account of the fact that the repatriation of bodies to this country some considerable time after death has occurred, revives emotions which it may be very desirable not to revise. That underlies our policy.

Hon. Members have asked whether the War Office can make any concession as regards the charges imposed. This matter is not really in our hands. The War Office itself could not undertake the task of repatriating bodies, certainly not the task of repatriation from all theatres where our men are situated. There are shipping difficulties, and there are other difficulties, to be encountered. So we decided that, in the circumstances, if relatives insisted on bringing bodies to this country, the task must be undertaken by outside agencies. The agency referred to by my hon. Friend the Member for West Salford, the Continental Express Company, was selected for recommendation in the case of B.A.O.R. because, having considered the various estimates, we found their charge was less excessive. I am prepared to agree, that, on the surface, the charges appear to be excessive. I have questioned them myself, and I have tried to see whether they could possibly be reduced.

We all recognise the sentimental attachment, the sentimental reasons, which induce relatives to ask for the repatriation of bodies, and we also recognise the fact, dislike it as we may, that many parents cannot afford to have bodies repatriated. On the other hand, there are parents who are better off and can afford it. It is the inequality that I dislike. On the other hand, it would seem to me to be unwise, if not unjust, to preclude the relatives of men who have lost their lives from repatriating bodies simply because they can afford it. To do so would confer no advantage on those who cannot afford it. So what I have tried to do in a practical way is to see if it is possible to have the charges reduced.

As regards the position of B.A.O.R., the War Office does not actually bear the cost of transit from any part of the B.A.O.R. to the Hook of Holland. It assists; it does not bear the cost, although there may be some part of the task we find it possible to accept. The costs in Germany are not, on the whole, excessive. They have to take account of the fact that coffins have to be carefully watched. They have to be placed very carefully in the wagons designed to carry them. They cannot be handled like ordinary freight, otherwise there would be serious trouble and much adverse comment. This is a very delicate matter. The costs rise in proportion to the care that is taken. When the bodies arrive at the Hook and have to be brought to this country the Continental Express Agency are generally responsible.

I have had a list of their charges placed in my hands. Perhaps hon. Mem- bers would be interested to have them read out: Reception, clearance through customs, supervision and shipping on board the export steamer at the Hook, which is paid by the company to the agents at the port, amounts to £3; carriage from the Hook to London, paid out to British Railways, £48 10s.; customs entry and clearance at Harwich, paid out to British Railways, £1 1s.; Continental Express Agency fee, £5 5s. and incidental expenses 10s. making a total of some £58. It may be that the agency fee appears excessive, but having regard to the duties imposed on the agency, I should not consider that they were charging too much. As regards the carriage charges which are imposed by British Railways, I am looking into them to see if it is possible to bring about some reduction. Beyond that I am afraid I cannot go.

If we agreed to undertake responsibility for repatriation of bodies, it would be very difficult for us to resist a claim of any one person. We should have to apply it all round, and that would impose a charge on the War Office which, I am afraid, we cannot undertake, and I doubt whether it is actually our responsibility, in view of the care that is taken in looking after British War cemeteries both in B.A.O.R. and in other parts of the world. Therefore, I doubt if I can go beyond what I have suggested.

The position is very much more difficult when we come to those countries referred to by the hon. Member for Tyne-mouth (Miss Colman). In Egypt, for example, there are physical conditions encountered in the exhumation of the body. The Egyptian Government will not permit exhumation to take place until 12 months after the body has been interred. That presents further difficulties, and the shipping costs are very high from the Middle East, even when shipping is available. As regards the Far East, it is still more difficult.

Concerning the matter raised by the hon. and gallant Member for the Isle of Ely (Major Legge-Bourke) in respect of Palestine, our policy is, as the hon. and gallant Member rightly said, to discourage quite definitely the repatriation of bodies from Palestine. We think that it would be unwise and many difficulties would arise if we endeavoured to meet the hon. and gallant Member's wishes. Certainly we cannot agree to repatriation in one case and refuse it in another. It would have to apply, as I have said, all round.

I must say that I fully sympathise with the purpose that animates my hon. Friends. I should very much like to assist them, but it is quite impossible for me to accept, certainly at this stage, the financial responsibility for repatriation. I wholeheartedly agree with my hon. Friend the Member for West Salford in his endeavour to discourage relatives from having bodies repatriated. I have seen the war cemeteries, and melancholy though it is to view these vast places where the bodies of British soldiers and other military personnel are interred, nevertheless, one feels some pride in the fact that the Commonwealth organisation—because the Commonwealth countries are represented on the Imperial War Graves Commission—have been able to carry out this very unpleasant and melancholy task with such delicacy and advantage to all concerned. So, much as I should like to meet my hon. Friend—who was so amiable in the presentation of his case that I found his appeal almost irresistable— I nevertheless should not care at present to reverse the policy that has been laid down. As I have said, I will look at the question of the alleged excessive charges, and if some other organisation can be provided or some means found for reducing the charges I shall certainly do my best to bring it about.

Before sitting down I should like to say just this about the visits by relatives to war graves, because the matter has been raised and my hon. Friend did say that he would mention it. There again some difficulty presents itself. Apart from Germany, where there is a limited provision for visits by relatives to war graves, there is no difficulty in Holland. France or Belgium, and I hope that shortly there will no difficulty as regards Italy, but that depends on shipping facilities. Although we cannot accept the responsibility and provide public money for visits by relatives to various theatres where the cemeteries are situated, there are voluntary organisations who have kindly offered their services, and who do provide some financial assistance in those cases where the relatives are unable to find the funds to enable them to go to those countries.

The hon. and gallant gentleman the Member for the Isle of Ely asked what was the relationship between the War Office and the Imperial War Graves Commission. The relationship so far as I am concerned is that I am chairman of the Imperial War Graves Commission, and, while I do not interfere unduly in their administrative tasks, I nevertheless have to exercise a certain supervision so long as I retain that position. But I am bound to say that on the whole I feel satisfied with the work now being undertaken by the Commission, and I doubt whether any of the criticisms occasionally launched against it could be justified. I shall continue to watch the position, and if I find it necessary to advise the Commission on any matter which is raised by hon. Members in this House, or by the public, or by relatives, whoever may be concerned, I shall certainly do so.

4.28 p.m.

Mr. E. L. Gandar Dower (Caithness and Sutherland)

I am grateful to you, Mr. Speaker, for allowing me to catch your eye at this stage, because I did endeavour to do so before the Minister rose.

I am particularly grateful to the Minister for his offer to look into the charge made by British Railways, because the figure of £48 10s. which he read out seems remarkably high. It will he remembered that today much of the Army is gathered by conscription, on the merits of which I have no desire to pass any opinion. However, it makes some parents reluctant to part with their children, and it makes the subject of death a particularly painful one. I am glad that the Secretary of State for War mentioned that there were charitable organisations which assisted parents to visit British cemeteries abroad, because it is obviously not within the means of every parent so to do.

I am sorry that this matter has arisen before such a thin House; it is perhaps rather sad that it should be debated on a Friday. I myself know from the experience of my father who lost a son in the 1914–18 war, what it meant to him not to be able to visit his son's grave. I also lost a brother in the 1939–45 war, and I feel much the same about that. I think that the Secretary of State has given a very sympathetic reception to this important matter brought forward by the hon. Member for West Salford (Mr. Royle), and I feel that if there is any improvement which can be undertaken it will be so undertaken.

Mr. Royle

Could my right hon. Friend tell me how many deaths actually occurred in B.A.O.R.? I ask that question in order to try to show what an infinitesimal amount would be involved.

Mr. Shinwell

I cannot reply off-hand, but I will get the information and let my hon. Friend know.

Miss Colman

Would the Secretary of State undertake to look at these charges in relation to the Near and Middle East as well as Germany?

Mr. Shinwell

Yes, I will.

The Question having been proposed after Four o'Clock and the Debate having continued for half an hour, Mr. SPEAKER adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.

Adjourned at Twenty-nine Minutes to Five o'Clock.