Page 162,7
8.
It may be suggested that, on the analogy of the action taken by the United States Government, Japanese assets now held in the United Kingdom and its dependent territories should be applied to meet these claims. Honourable Members will recall that, as was stated in the House on 28th April, 1949, the estimated net value of Japanese assets in the United Kingdom is somewhere between one and one and a quarter million pounds sterling. It is our intention to press for a clause in the Peace Treaty to provide for the transfer of these assets to His Majesty's Government.
It goes without saying, however, that this sum would be wholly inadequate to meet even the claims already registered in the United Kingdom. Japanese assets held in British Colonial and Protected territories would be wholly inadequate to meet claims in those territories. The disposal of these assets also must, however, await the conclusion of a Peace Treaty and the subsequent decision of Colonial Governments.
9.
In this situation His Majesty's Government have considered to what extent individual claims in respect of damage to property or hardship or personal injury caused by Japanese war-time acts could be met from the United Kingdom Exchequer. This Government, like their war-time predecessors, have taken the view that it would be out of the question for the State to attempt to recompense every form of loss or hardship suffered by its citizens as a result of the war. The general policy adopted with regard to United Kingdom residents has been to provide for their
rehabilitation.
To this end, provision has been made for certain payments in respect of war damage or loss of personal chattels. Illnesses have been treated and pensions have been awarded for residual disablement or death resulting from personal injury. Certain United Kingdom residents who have suffered damage to private property or personal injury at Japanese hands are already eligible for awards on this basis under existing schemes - e.g. Far Eastern Private Chattels Scheme; special provisions analogous to the United Kingdom Personal Injuries (Civilians) Scheme; and the Ministry of Pensions warrants relating to pensions, etc., for members of the Armed Forces. Special steps were taken, and are still being taken, to secure the rehabilitation of those whose health was affected by the appalling sufferings which they endured in captivity in Japanese hands. This was a clear duty owed to these ex-captives by their more fortunate fellow citizens. But it is a different matter to provide out of United Kingdom taxes some financial benefit in addition to rehabilitation, treatment and pensions, and it would clearly be difficult to make any distinction for this purpose between the victims of Japanese war-time acts and those who have suffered as the result of the action of other enemies of His Majesty's Government during the recent war. Honourable Members will recall the statement made on behalf of the Government in this matter by my honourable friend, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for War in the debate on 13th June, 1950. After very careful consideration the Government have decided that it would be wrong to lay upon the United Kingdom tax- payer the additional burden entailed in the payment from public funds of awards in respect of individual claims beyond those already provided.
10.
It may with justice be asked, however, in what manner His Majesty's Government propose to dispose of Japanese assets in the United Kingdom once a peace treaty has made their realisation possible. As has already been indicated, their estimated value amount s to a small fraction of the value of the claims already registered in this country. The minute sub-division and distribution of this sum among the many thousands of deserving cases would confer little real benefit nor could such small sums in any sense be considered compensation for their losses and sufferings. His Majesty &6587nment have therefore decided that after the Peace.
-50
143