§ Mr. Haleasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (1) when the British Embassy in Luxembourg was first approached by the university student living in Oldham, West, whose name has been communicated to him and who had been robbed of his travellers cheques, cash, passport and return ticket home;
(2) when his Department received information from the British Embassy in Luxembourg that an application had been received for emergency assistance from a university student living in Old- 372W ham, West; and when they received full information about the robbery and the report to the police and the full circumstances of the case;
(3) what reason was given by the British Embassy, and when, for leaving a university student living in Oldham, West, destitute in Luxembourg and without passport, university cards, travellers cheques, cash, and return ticket home; and whether this information included the word hitch-hiking or words to that effect.
§ Mrs. WhiteThe Embassy in Luxembourg received a telephone call on behalf of the student on the evening of 10th September and the student himself called at 09.30 on 12th September when he reported the theft of his passport and money.
Information about the student's need of funds was received by the Department concerned in the Foreign Office at 10.30 on 13th September. I regret this delay, about which I am writing to my hon. Friend.
The theft was reported to the Foreign Office by Oldham police on 21st September and details were received from the student on 24th September. Details of the circumstances leading to his repatriation were received from the Embassy on 23rd September. The information did not include the words hitch-hiking, or any words to that effect.
Before deciding that the student's father should be asked to deposit the cost of repatriation, the Embassy made certain that board and lodging were available. The question of emergency assistance therefore did not arise.