§ THE LORD BISHOP OF NORWICH asked His Majesty's Government whether they have any scheme by which some contribution could be made to the fares of parents of children evacuated at the Government's instigation in cases where the railway or bus fare is above a certain amount, and the parents have not seen their children for a certain specified time.
65§ The right reverend Prelate said: My Lords, I rise to make the inquiry which stands under my name. In doing so I am conscious I am following big things with smaller things, or what I may call proceeding from the universal to the particular. In regard to the matter that has been engaging our attention, I may say it is one which is very near my heart, for constantly find myself in one of our most important ports, from which the men of the Mercantile Marine encer their ships. I was more than pleased the other day—and here I refer to what recently we heard from Lord Strabolgi—to find the admirable system there set up for the educating of cooks for the trawlers.
§ My question refers to the unhappy parents of children evacuated from their homes and carried to distant places. There is a town in the Diocese of Norwich from which, under very strong persuasion, the children have been evacuated. One cannot say it is compulsory evacuation, but the schools were evacuated, and there are no schools in the town for the children to frequent. That has been the case for the last fifteen months. The children themselves may not come home to stay, though they can come horn: for a short school holiday. This makes a meeting with their parents a costly enterprise, whether the children come to the parents or the parents go to the places in the Midlands where their children are. Some little time ago I had a conversation with the Chairman of one of our great railway systems, and I put before him the unfortunate position of parents who live in this particular town. As things then stood, the availability of the ticket which they could secure was too short to give the parents an adequate time for covering the journey in both directions and really seeing something of the children. Thanks to his goodness, the matter was attended to on all the railways, and the result was that the availability of the ticket was so far enlarged that it was made worth while for the parents to face the journey out and in with the certainty that they would be with their children for a time long enough to justify the expense and the time involved.
§ The railway companies generously adjusted the matter, and I am venturing to ask His Majesty's Government to follow this lead and to go a step further. In spite of the cheap travel facilities arranged by the Ministry of Health to enable parents to visit their children, 66 very many of them have not seen their children since they were evacuated, for the reason that they cannot afford the expense of the journey. In the case of the town in the Diocese of Norwich to which I refer there are no cheap fares less than £1 to bring a father or mother to the temporary home of the child and sometimes the fare is two or three shillings more. The journey involves two days travel, with its losses, in addition to the time spent in the reception area. I understand that special reduced fares are offered to parents receiving unemployment payment, and I believe the parents in receipt of public assistance-get help in a similar manner. Such cheap facilities, I believe, are granted to men serving in His Majesty's Forces and also to the teachers and the helpers evacuated with these children. I have been told of a number of cases in which a father and mother are genuinely unable to pay the necessary fare.
§ What I am asking is whether the Government, using the machinery of the proper Department, would be willing to extend these facilities to parents who have not been able to afford the cost of the journey to see their children. Every case, of course, would be inquired into very strictly, but these parents, when their case has been proved to be a good one, would share the privilege, or part of the privilege, accorded to those in receipt of unemployment or public assistance. On the general question, it appears to be desirable to make the whole plan of evacuation as acceptable as circumstances permit. The country, I feel sure, would not wish to create what I may call a special grievance; and I hope your Lordships will consider that it is important just now that the Government should, wherever possible, join in the spirit of sympathy and neighbourliness which is abroad among us. A gesture of this kind reaches much further than the restricted number of parents who would be helped to keep the affection of their children and family life as close and tender as these hard times permit. There is such a thing as a real bereavement which is not caused by the long journey to that bourne from which no traveller returns. If we cannot heal the one at least we can do something to soothe the other. Sunt lacrimae rerum: mentem mortalia tangunt.
67§ LORD SNELLMy Lords, with the cooperation of the railway companies, arrangements have already been made under which parents, wishing to visit evacuated children, may obtain special cheap travel facilities. Vouchers entitling the holder to travel at a reduced fare may be obtained once a month by each parent. Return tickets available for three days are obtainable where the journey cannot conveniently be made in one day, and during the holiday season parents have been able to obtain one ticket, available for a period of eight days, so as to enable them to spend their summer holiday with their children. The fares charged under these arrangements represent a very substantial reduction on the ordinary fares, more particularly for the longer journeys, as will be seen by one or two examples with which I will trouble your Lordships for the purposes of illustration.
Taking the starting point as London, if a parent desires to go, say, to Leicester, which is 99 miles away, the ordinary monthly return fare is 20s. 3d., but the special return fare for visits to evacuees would for one day be only 12s. 10d., and for three or eight days, 14s.11d. If Brid-port is the place which it is desired to reach, this is 149¼ miles away. The ordinary return fare is 29s. 9d. A ticket may be had by visiting parents for 14s.7d. or, for three or eight days, 18s. 1d. Take Torquay as another illustration. It is 199¾ miles from London. The monthly return fare is 40s. 5d., and an evacuee return fare may be had for 16s. 4d. If we take the furthest point, Penzance, which is 305£ miles away, the ordinary return fare is 62s. 2d. and the special return fare for visits to evacuees is 23s. 1d. If the parent wishes to travel to Scotland, to Edinburgh say, 392 miles away, the return ordinary fare is 80s. 11d. and, for three or eight days, the return fare for visits to evacuees is 38s. 3d. There are no similar arrangements in force for cheap road fares, but road services and supplementary fuel rations are authorised where there are no suitable railway facilities, and the Regional Transport Commissioners, when authorising these services, ensure that the fares are at a level which is not unreasonable for this class of service. Finally, parents who are in receipt of unemployment assistance and are unable to afford even the reduced fares, may apply to the Public Assistance Board for a 68 special grant to enable them to visit their children, and Public Assistance authorities have been empowered to make similar grants to parents who are in receipt of public assistance.
THE LORD BISHOP OF NORWICHMy Lords, I am very much obliged to the noble Lord for his reply. I can only express the hope that perhaps the Government will go a little further than they have done, and will not restrict the advantage of very much reduced fares to parents who are in receipt of public assistance.