Holocaust Era Insurance Claims (Hansard, 9 April 2001)

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, the Government wholeheartedly support the principle of restitution, as was demonstrated by the London conference on nazi gold in 1997 and the establishment of the Enemy Property Compensation Scheme. We applaud the establishment, in 1998, of an International Commission on Holocaust Era Insurance Claims. However, it remains for individual insurance companies to decide whether formally to join the commission and to decide the extent of their involvement in its work.

§ Lord Janner of Braunstone
My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that Answer. I thank him especially for his recognition of the work of the international commission on insurance claims, commonly known as ICHEIC, which is headed by Larry Eagleberger. Is my noble friend aware that there are only two major insurance companies in the world with holocaust era claims against them that have not joined the commission? One is Munich Re, in Germany, which had nazi connections; the other, sadly, is the Prudential in this country. As the chairman of the Prudential has seen fit to write to me saying that he supports ICHEIC in its goals, the inference to be drawn from the Prudential not joining is that it has something to hide or does not wish for the transparency that is required of those who become members. Sadly, this has led to a threat from the US of a boycott. Saluting as I do the work of my noble and learned friend Lord Archer of Sandwell on the Enemy Property Compensation Panel, which he chairs, and the honourable transparency to which that has led, surely it is wrong for the Prudential at this stage to prefer to keep apart from the equivalent joint process in the insurance world. Please will Her Majesty's Government have an appropriate word in the ear of those concerned?

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, I certainly agree that any talk of a boycott of insurance companies would not be helpful. I repeat that a decision to join ICHEIC is for the insurance company itself to take. I understand, from a copy of a letter from the chairman of the Prudential to my noble friend Lord Janner, which he has been good enough to show me, that the Prudential believes that it co-operates fully with ICHEIC, both in dealing with claims that arrive from ICHEIC and in exchanging information with the commission. Although this is a decision for the Prudential, clearly the company will be influenced 989 by its need to ensure that it maintains good relations with insurance commissioners in the different states in the US.

§ Lord Archer of Sandwell
My Lords, perhaps I may express my appreciation to my noble friend Lord Janner for his kind references to the Enemy Property Compensation Panel, as I do for his many other kindnesses to me. Will my noble friend confirm that the dispute in this case appears to relate to whether those who seek to rectify an injustice should do so unilaterally, or whether it is better to do so in conjunction with others who share the same purpose? Does my noble friend agree that, where possible, it is better to do so in conjunction with others—first, because it helps to ensure transparency and accountability and, secondly, because they do good twice who encourage others to emulate them?

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, I agree with my noble friend that co-operation in these matters and acting together are a good thing. The Prudential argues that it complies with all of the conditions of ICHEIC and that it co-operates with the commission in both directions. Whether to observe the formality of membership of ICHEIC must remain a matter for the Prudential.

§ Lord Clarke of Hampstead
My Lords, my noble friend the Minister said that the question of whether to join ICHEIC is a decision for individual insurance companies. Would he care to comment on the behaviour of the Prudential and on whether it is compatible with the DTI document Business and Society: Developing Corporate Social Responsibility in the UK?

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, I am being invited to go rather wide of the Question. Clearly, the DTI document referred to covers a much wider range of issues; we had better debate them on an occasion when those wider issues are before the House.

§ Lord Borrie
My Lords, is it not the case that the Minister at the Department of Trade and Industry, Dr Kim Howells, among his many other attributes, is the Minister for Corporate Social Responsibility? Will my noble friend the Minister go a little further than he has done and exercise the collective charm and influence of government on the decision—which, as he rightly says, is ultimately for the Prudential itself?

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, I do not know that I can rival Kim Howells' charm and decisiveness. I believe that the directors of the Prudential Assurance Company will read this exchange and will take note of the views expressed; and they will take note of the Government's endorsement of the existence and aims of the International Commission on Holocaust Era Insurance Claims.

§ Lord Janner of Braunstone
My Lords, if the Prudential is co-operating fully and agrees with the 990 aims of ICHEIC, does it recognise the anger and irritation it is causing by not joining almost all other honourable companies in this process?

§ Lord McIntosh of Haringey
My Lords, my noble friend almost invites me to put myself in the place of the Prudential Assurance Company, and I certainly cannot do that. I repeat: I believe that the company will pay attention to what has been said from all sides of the House.