|Previous Section||Back to Table of Contents||Lords Hansard Home Page|
Lord Montague of Oxford: My Lords, in the late 1960s and early 1970s I had the good fortune to be responsible for exports to Asia, particularly to Japan. When we mounted British Week in 1969 I remember the accusation that it was rather difficult to sell coal to Newcastle, and so it would be when it came to selling to Japan. It is heartening to hear from the noble Viscount, Lord Trenchard, who has so ably reminded us of the benefits of our current relations with Japan and its great success, with a surplus in the past year of over £1 billion. There are other successes. I refer to the number of tourists who come to our shores. In the past year 700,000 came here. That is a sign of interest in this country and a further reflection of the identity between our two great nations.
I should like to make a few points in the brief period that is allotted to me. They may sound rather trivial but I hope that they are of help. What have we to learn? This debate reminds us about the future. What should we change? I have been reading that the Japanese are not as knowledgeable as they might be about our culture. But, equally, we are not as knowledgeable as we might be about their culture. Therefore, there is room to improve our understanding of the Japanese. I shall give a few examples which may seem rather petty but I hope that they will be helpful to those who have day-to-day relationships with the Japanese.
Japanese people do not like what I would call the hail-fellow-well-met, back-slapping endearments which we sometimes use with each other. They are a very reserved race and they expect that of others. Strangely enough, the Japanese do not welcome eye contact. It is more respectful when you are dealing with the Japanese slightly to avert your eyes than it is to stare them out, as it were, with a feeling of great sincerity.
Of course, when it comes to putting on a great spread for your Japanese visitors, I strongly advise that, however good your culinary skills, you do not try them on the Japanese because they are really completely at home with their own palate. Japanese people like Japanese food. Therefore, if you wish to make friends, it is better to make contact with somebody who can provide the Japanese with the food which they like so much.
It was my good fortune at that time to meet the now Emperor, the then Crown Prince, and to hear how impressed he was with our country and what great respect he has for it. Those were not just words. He was to go on to do something which no Japanese Emperor has ever done before: he decided that his son should be educated in our country. There could be no stronger personal example of his respect for this country.
I was most pleased to hear the noble Viscount, Lord Slim, indicate that he anticipated that, in spite of the difficulties of which he justifiably reminded us, a warm welcome would be given to the Emperor. That is very encouraging. That would be extremely helpful as regards the way in which the press deal with this matter. We know that the press must sell newspapers and that colourful headlines are the main means by which they do that. Therefore, if our veterans do, very understandably, engage in gestures which draw attention to their feelings, I believe that that may be misrepresented by the media and will not do our country the certain good which will otherwise come from the Emperor's visit.
I end with a closing thank-you note to the Foreign Office and the Japanese Embassy for one of the arrangements that has been made. I was present when the previous visit of the last Emperor took place in the 1970s and I remember that he put on his reciprocal state banquet at Claridges. Some vision on the part of the Japanese Embassy means that on this occasion it will take place in the Victoria and Albert Museum. It may be that we shall see each other there and have a good evening.
Lord Sandberg: My Lords, it is perhaps difficult, perhaps even arrogant, for those who did not have first-hand knowledge of Japanese atrocities to seek to suggest to those who did that they should now forgive and forget. But we must remember that it was a long time ago. When I was posted out east in the late 1940s, many of my British colleagues had suffered privations and suffering in camps, having been captured in Malaya, Singapore or China. They had fearful tales to tell. Indeed, British commercial companies which had opened up in Japan very often told their employees that if they did not wish to serve in Japan, they need not do so. The staff may not have appreciated that gesture, but I do not know anyone who asked not to be posted there.
Indeed, during the three-and-a-half years which I spent in Japan, I cannot remember anyone speaking gloatingly to the Japanese about their humiliation and occupation. That was a lesson which I certainly took to heart. The Japanese man on the street was under no illusions because as a private soldier he had probably been thoroughly abused by his NCOs and officers, who had very little regard for the private soldiers.
Why have the Japanese Government never really said sorry or mea culpa? I do not know the reason. Why has the compensation been so derisory? Among other things, I believe that the Japanese find that it is difficult to articulate the shame. We are taught that it is not difficult to say sorry, but the culture of the Japanese world and the western world are not the same. The noble Viscount, Lord Trenchard, made a good point--that Japanese culture makes it difficult for individuals to emerge as leaders and, therefore, it is also difficult for them to apologise on behalf of their country. Ideally, for the Japanese everything must be done by consensus. That is well illustrated by a Chinese thought, and the Chinese are nothing if not individuals. It is said that if one pits one Chinese against one Japanese, there is a Chinese victory; two Chinese against two Japanese, there is a draw; and three Chinese against three Japanese and it is a Japanese victory. It is a difficult position for Japanese leaders to take.
One must remember that there has been the same lack of apology to the inhabitants of Asia whose countries were occupied. Perhaps that is nowhere more apparent than in China, where people suffered more grievously and far longer than anybody else. As the noble Viscount, Lord Slim, said, the Chinese are ever mindful of leopards and spots and they are fearful of anything which suggests re-arming by the Japanese. But they have accepted that the atrocities are of the past and there is no real benefit to continue harping on them and about that period.
It is now well over 50 years since the end of the war, and I suggest that it is no longer appropriate, even for those who suffered directly, to continue to carry that torch. Many of those who were in Japanese camps were adamant that the Korean guards were more brutal than the Japanese. Korea was a colony of Japan at that time. But we do not seek apologies or restitution from Korea. Nor do we seek apologies from North Korea or Vietnam for the sufferings experienced in those more recent wars. Indeed, much suffering was experienced.
I began by saying that it is not easy for those of us who did not suffer directly to tell people to forgive and forget. It is not easy, but now I do appeal to them not to continue their protest and especially not to do so during the coming visit of the Japanese Emperor.
Lord Dearing: My Lords, the noble Viscount, Lord Slim, spoke movingly on behalf of the veterans and his words merit our respect. Our concern is the relations between our country and Japan and I have two points which I wish to make.
First, I believe those relations would be enhanced to our benefit if there were open and generous recognition of the contribution that the Japanese manufacturing industry has been making over the past 20 years to the regeneration and renaissance of the economies of the old heavy industry areas of Britain. I speak with some knowledge of the north-east of England where so much has been contributed. The headlines are made by major investors, by companies like NSK, the first to come to the north-east, Komatsu, Nissan, Fujitsu, Sanyo and many others. They have contributed to the lives of families in cities. That is very clear and obvious. However, less obvious is the influence that they have had on our thinking about manufacturing.
I was impressed by the commitment of the Japanese to quality. I remember being present in a large audience of north-east businessmen who were electrified by a senior manager of a Japanese company saying to them all those years ago that, by the year 2000, 100 per cent. quality would not be a competitive advantage; it would be the entry ticket to the marketplace. I have seen Japanese companies practising just that. I have seen the respect that they have for their workforce and their commitment to training those people. I have visited their factories and have seen that, for every man and woman, there is a training plan for the year. I have seen their progress being ticked on the charts. I have also seen their commitment to the development of long-lasting relationships with suppliers in this country.
I remember so well talking to a company which was tendering to one of those Japanese companies. It had been told that its prices were too high. The Japanese company said, "Trust us, supply at our prices, and we will re-engineer your manufacturing processes. You will prosper". The company did so and won contracts in other parts of the world. It is that kind of unseen and unsung contribution which has permeated so much of our thinking. I am not saying that many British companies do not think that way, but it has not always been the common practice. I believe that the Japanese have enriched our attitude as regards working effectively with people. It will help if we recognise that fact in terms of our relationship with Japan. Indeed, it will help if the Japanese people know that we are respectful of their contribution.
My second point relates to my consciousness derived from my dealings with Japan on visits to that country. For example, I recently visited Japan as the guest of the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science. I was struck by the commitment of the Japanese to learn from other people and by their respect for British education. I was invited to go across and, when I went to the Monbusho, I was astonished to find that a report of some 400 pages, which we had recently produced, had been translated into Japanese. Indeed, the Japanese had not only read it, they also understood it and debated it vigorously. I am not talking about just two or three chosen specialists; I am talking about the whole of the top brass of the ministry.
I have recently been impressed by the way in which Japan, notwithstanding its success in the international league tables in performance, has become concerned about its national language and mathematics and about
I was invited to take part in a conference two weeks ago at which the Japanese were interested to see how they could learn from us; indeed, I was interested to know how we could perhaps best learn from their strengths. It would make for good relations between our two countries if we on our side were as anxious to learn from them as they are to learn from us. We have much to learn. For example, we are now concerned about developing citizenship, and about respect for other people and communities; in other words, a feeling of obligation to our fellows. That is engendered in children in the very earliest years in the kindergarten/primary schools in Japan. Perhaps we have something to learn from that example.
Perhaps in the British Council, for which I have much respect and admiration, we have a bridge which should become a broad highway and across which we can exchange information and learn from each other to our mutual advantage, thereby improving relations between our two countries.
Lord Howell of Guildford: My Lords, like other speakers, I am extremely grateful to the noble Viscount, Lord Trenchard, for promoting tonight's debate. I am also grateful to the noble Viscount, Lord Slim, for his most moving reminder to us that we must respect our veterans and that it would be an impertinence to preach to them about what they should think after what they suffered and in view of the memories that they hold.
This is a difficult debate because the truth is that such issues have to be put in separate compartments. Indeed, the truth is that these atrocities happened and unspeakable brutalities occurred. No sweet words or preaching of reconciliation can wipe those facts from the memories of families in this country, nor, indeed, from the memories of veterans. Similarly, it is not acceptable to say, as many Japanese argue, that the whole score was settled by the dropping of the atom bombs.
Nothing we say can change Japan's past. It had a dark side and a bright side. Countries are what they are and what they have grown to be. Perhaps that is something that we could more usefully remember in the European context. Cultures are important; they do not just vanish, nor can they be brushed away.
In the Imperial War Museum there is a recipe which was written by my grandmother. It explains how you can survive on the daily Japanese rations in an internment and labour camp, like the one in Shanghai where my grandmother was detained. She was dragged there by the Japanese troops when they came storming up the driveway of her home. Colonel Shingo took all of her possessions--her car, and so on--and gave her a little note, which I still have. It is a rather small note, which, curiously enough was signed by Colonel Shingo but not in Japanese, promising to return all those things at the
I described that because it must have been the experience of many other people as civilian property was not compensated under the 1951 treaty. I should add that, although it cannot be forgotten, nothing of this kind should get in the way of the facts of today. As the noble Viscount, Lord Trenchard, described, we have received enormous benefits from our contacts with Japan as regards their investment here. Indeed, we have learnt a great deal from our cultural, business and scientific exchanges, and we need to learn massively more from Japan about relationships in the modern industrial society. The co-operation of the Japanese with us in third world countries has been brilliant and dedicated, as well as being highly effective. Their co-operation with us in security matters is something which is often not so prominent, but in surveillance and in handling the Middle-East problems of Iraq and the Gulf War their efforts have all been dedicated and efficient.
The Japan of today may be in a different compartment to that of the Japan of the atrocities of Burma. Indeed, the people today are dedicated to helping build a better world and stabilising extremely difficult situations. Even now, with Japan in recession--indeed, perhaps more so now--this is the moment for us to build on that friendship. To put it crudely, it is directly in our national interest to do so and to gain greater access to the Japanese markets and to Japanese internal investment. Moreover, when a country is down--and we are friends with Japan--it is the mark of a true friend to offer help at that time.
Above all, at this time of very dangerous turmoil in Asia, perhaps we need to ensure that our support for, and bilateral links with, Japan reinforce degrees of stability and provide some kind of rock upon which Asia can be stabilised. As I have said before in this House, this is a moment of colossal danger. There will be many worse effects to come as a result of the Asian turmoil and there will be huge difficulties. It is vitally important that Japan should not be dragged down.
I do not agree with those who say that we should brush out the past; indeed, the past will remain fresh in many memories--and an awful past it was. In a separate compartment of life we have to build for the future with Japan, which is a brilliant nation. It has much in common with us: we are two islands with two monarchies. These people are our friends. Therefore, on that basis, we should not forget the past but we should build constructively for the future. We have an enormous amount to gain for all our people, including the children and grandchildren of all those who suffered and died, if we take a positive view.
Lord Gillmore of Thamesfield: My Lords, I, too, want to congratulate the noble Viscount, Lord Trenchard, on having introduced tonight's debate. His speech demonstrated his knowledge and experience of Japan which he brings in an unrivalled way to your
My experience of Japan is no doubt less deep and probably more recent than that of the noble Viscount. It goes back to 1982 when I led a small team of two to talk to the Japanese about strategic planning and arms control issues. At that time discussion of such matters with the United Kingdom was regarded in Japan as highly sensitive and almost taboo. While we had made great strides in our contacts on commercial and economic matters, this was the first time since the war that the Japanese had had direct official contacts on defence related issues with anyone other than the Americans. In 15 years we have come a long way.
A large part of the credit for this goes, I believe, to successive British Governments who have persisted in their efforts to establish not only a more open dialogue but a more co-operative and productive relationship. I recall a visit by the noble and learned Lord, Lord Howe of Aberavon, in the early days of 1988 which marked a watershed in this development. Since then our contacts have grown at great speed across a whole spectrum of our relations, not just at official level. I shall not repeat the points made by previous speakers as there is not time, but I endorse the point that Japan is, and will remain, a vastly important country as regards the United Kingdom, as an economic player, as a market, as an investor, as a partner across a whole range of international issues, and as a partner too in a range of youth and cultural exchanges to which reference has already been made.
Not all of these matters are wholly, or even perhaps mainly, matters for governments. But, just as it took a concentrated effort on the part of the two governments to start a process which is now beginning to yield its fruit, so it will need the active stimulus and encouragement of governments to build on what has already been achieved. The visit to Tokyo of the Prime Minister, then leader of the opposition, shortly before the previous election is, I hope, a signal of the importance which this Government attach to Japan. I am confident that the Minister will be able to give us this evening an assurance that the expansion of Anglo-Japanese ties will remain one of Her Majesty's Government's top priorities.
Important as these bilateral programmes of co-operation are, they are not, however, the whole story. Other noble Lords have referred to the crisis now affecting the Japanese economy and its financial system. It is easy, not least in Japan itself, to underestimate the dangers of soldiering on, undertaking only minor tinkering with a system which has appeared to serve Japan so well for so very long. However, there is a need for major reforms, most of which will have to be carried through over the protests of deep and vested interests. It is in the British--indeed the wider international--interest that these reforms should be implemented, and soon. They will have to be targeted at the opening up and the deregulation of Japanese markets and, above all, the thorough cleansing of its financial system. The latter
In this context it is essential that pressures from vested interests to delay the implementation of "Big Bang" should be resisted. The power of the yakuza or gangster must be curbed. Above all, the reforms must include legal requirements for transparency in business and banking and proper measures for corporate governance. It is a measure of how considerable these steps are for Japan that in Japanese there is no proper translation of the word "accountability".
Moreover, it cannot any longer be said that such matters are internal to Japan (or indeed to any other major economic power) in these days of globalisation. They matter deeply to the UK, to our industrial, scientific and banking businesses, just as Britain's intentions on economic and monetary union matter to Japanese businesses, particularly those with a significant investment in this country. Japan's industrial base is immensely strong, especially in industries with a major interest in exporting. But the self-perpetuating Japanese managerial oligarchies so common in large swathes of Japanese business will have to be reformed if Japan is to avoid major economic damage, with all the consequent and dire effects on the rest of the world.
As the noble Lord, Lord Dearing, has so eloquently pointed out, we have over the past two decades learnt much from Japan. I believe that there is every indication now that many influential Japanese think that they can with advantage pick our brains too. I hope that the Government will be ready to assist where they can--through sharing our experience of both general deregulation and the creation of non-governmental regulatory authorities, of the use of the private finance initiative, of reforms in systems of corporate governance and so on.
Lord Moynihan: My Lords, I greatly appreciate the excellent introduction to the debate by my noble friend Lord Trenchard for which I most sincerely thank him. While modern Japan has flourished economically and democratically, this debate has highlighted one hindrance to Britain's close friendship with Japan, one barrier in which a chapter of our joint history has not yet been fully closed on a terrible past. One of the most sensitive, difficult and painful issues of our time is the story of our former prisoners of war in Japan, many of whom still seek a formal and unequivocal apology from the Japanese Government as well as compensation so that those remaining survivors can end their days at peace with the past.
The pain and atrocity they suffered as captives in Japanese prison camps is still a vivid and daily experience for the survivors. One-quarter of those taken prisoner did not survive. It is incumbent on those of us too young to remember and those of us who were not
Prime Minister Hashimoto gave an expression of deep remorse to people who suffered in the Second World War during the Prime Minister's trip to Tokyo and he announced that further resources would be made available to promote reconciliation. We on these Benches wholeheartedly welcomed that statement but regret the subsequent confusion about whether it was collective and made on behalf of the Cabinet or whether it was made personally by the Prime Minister. We on these Benches welcome the same active dedication shown by the present Government in continuing to work to resolve this most sensitive of issues. We regard the progress made on apologies as a natural advance on top of the work of successive governments.
Successive British and Japanese governments have regarded the question of compensation as legally settled by the 1951 San Francisco peace treaty which ended the state of war between the UK and Japan, although a number of former PoWs and civilian internees are pushing individual claims in the Japanese courts for additional compensation from the Japanese Government. The 1951 treaty gave the Allies the right to seize and to dispose of Japanese property within their jurisdiction, although this was done according to financial prosperity. The proceeds of Japan's overseas investments were taken in settlement of claims for compensation. However inadequate the terms may have appeared--indeed, they still appear so--Japan, economically ravaged by war, discharged its legal obligations. Whatever its historical rights and wrongs, its practical difficulties, and indeed the moral issues involved, the 1951 peace treaty continues to define the legal position on compensation today. Successive British governments have accepted that the question of compensation is covered by it.
I wish to mention the recent claims by veterans that they have uncovered documentary evidence in the Public Record Office at Kew that merits a new challenge to the compensation paid to surviving prisoners under the 1951 treaty. Article 26 of the 1951 treaty states that, should Japan make a peace settlement or war claims settlement with any state, granting that state
those advantages should be extended to all other parties to the treaty. I understand that the Foreign Office has been conducting research into the historical facts and the legal implications of the documents, which we welcome. Can the Minister give the House an update on the Foreign Office's findings so far? As I understand it, the Government's preliminary legal advice suggests that nothing has changed and there will be no reopening of negotiations with Japan over payments. However, it would be most helpful if the Minister could give further details of what the Government's legal advice suggests and when the Government will receive a final opinion.
The issue is once again in the spotlight as a result of the Emperor of Japan's impending state visit. Given that the Emperor has a non-political role under Japan's constitution, what steps have the Government taken to ensure that next week's state visit of their Majesties the Emperor and Empress of Japan will indeed be seen as testimony to the excellent state of Anglo-Japanese relations and that it will be a celebration of what the citizens of the two countries have achieved, as clearly outlined by the noble Lord, Lord Dearing, and what they can go on to achieve in the future?
From these Benches we fully support any action which ensures that while we never forget the horrors of the last war and honour those who suffered and those who died, at the same time we build strong new ties with Japan that make such hostility unthinkable in the future.
I conclude by saying that differences between our two countries, whether historical or contemporary, should not be allowed to obscure the vast amount that Britain and Japan have in common. The twin histories of our two countries have shaped a common outlook on many issues. As island powers, Britain and Japan are, by history and by nature, trading nations. We are leaders of international commerce. As constitutional monarchies, as rightly pointed out by my noble friend, we share a commitment to democracy and a respect for tradition and stability, coupled with the capacity to evolve to meet new challenges. We share a belief in the continuing role of sovereign independent states and a sense of the international duty that properly falls to any major country.
We wish the visit of the Emperor and Empress of Japan every success. We warmly welcome the good relations between Britain and Japan that the previous government worked so hard to encourage, a relationship which I hope will be equally cherished and valued by the present Government.
Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: My Lords, I, too, am most grateful to the noble Viscount, Lord Trenchard, for tabling this debate about our relations with Japan. Japan today is a key partner for the UK. The closeness of our relationship, which was highlighted by the Prime Minister's visit to Tokyo in January, reflects the transformation that has taken place in Japan over the past 50 years.
Japan is now the world's largest bilateral aid donor and the second largest contributor to the United Nations. It is a prosperous, peaceful and democratic country. In the field of international diplomacy, our shared values and similar objectives increasingly lead us to work together, sometimes bilaterally but more often in multilateral fora such as the G8 and the United Nations.
As the noble Lord, Lord Howell of Guildford, reminded us, in the recent Iraqi crisis, for example, it was close co-operation between our diplomats in New York which produced consensus on the final Security Council resolution. On Indian nuclear tests today we are consulting closely. That does not happen by accident. It is the result of both our countries having similar approaches to solving the great problems facing mankind today.
The close relationship between Britain and Japan underpinned the success of the second Asia-Europe meeting in London last month. As co-ordinators for the summit preparations, we were able to share with our respective regional partners our experience of co-operation and the rewards it brings.
In many other fields, we can see partnerships between Britain and Japan. As the noble Lord, Lord Dearing, mentioned, there are exchanges on science. Our scientists are now engaged in some 200 collaborative projects. Britain's exports to Japan have risen rapidly in recent years, reaching a record of £4.3 billion in 1996. We export innovative products at the forefront of technology as well as more traditional items. We are working hard, with the support of the Japanese Government, to promote British goods in Japan.
A natural consequence of our growing commercial links is to find British and Japanese companies working together around the world. Our overseas aid agencies have similarly found ways to co-operate on projects from Bosnia to Africa, combining our skills and resources for the benefit of other nations.
The noble Viscount, Lord Trenchard, mentioned the contribution which Japanese inward investment has made our own prosperity. Just as important, perhaps, have been the new technologies and management styles which they have introduced to Britain, as instanced by the noble Lord, Lord Dearing. This genuine partnership across cultures has been outstandingly successful.
As indicated by the noble Lord, Lord Gillmore, a quiet revolution is taking place in our relations with Japan which is laying the foundations for an even closer partnership in the future. Exchanges between the young people of Britain and Japan are blossoming. There are thousands of Japanese students studying in British universities and under the Japanese Exchange and Teaching programme there are over 1,000 British graduates in Japan at any one time teaching English in Japanese schools. These exchanges are creating a pool of thousands of young British and Japanese people with direct experience of each other's culture and each other's society. This familiarity is pervading our countries, encouraging contacts and co-operation at all levels.
Japan today is going through a period of economic difficulty, but that has not diminished the long-term commitment of world-class companies such as Toyota and Sony to the UK, as the noble Lord, Lord Dearing, reminded us in a timely intervention. Such companies are part of the fundamental strength of Japan's
Short-term economic prospects, however, have been clouded by bad debts and financial markets and the reluctance of Japanese consumers to spend. The Japanese Government recognise this and have taken politically difficult measures to address the problems. We welcome the fiscal package announced last month to boost economic activity and improve confidence.
The noble Lord, Lord Howell, reminded us, as he has done in previous debates in your Lordships' House, of the seriousness of the current Asian financial crisis. The Japanese Prime Minister, along with other G7 leaders, confirmed last weekend in Birmingham the importance he attaches to growth and stability. This is not only for our economies--that is, the G7 economies--but also for other economies in the world, particularly those in Asia.
In the medium-term Japan's deregulation programme has an important role to play in increasing efficiency and securing the economy's return to sustainable growth. Much has been done towards deregulation in Japan which we welcome. But we also have a unique expertise to share with Japan as its own version of the so-called "big bang" gets underway.
Several noble Lords, particularly the noble Viscount, Lord Trenchard, today referred to the forthcoming state visit by their Majesties, the Emperor and Empress of Japan. This visit will be a celebration of the modern partnership between our countries and of the links which have been described in our debate this evening. The visit coincides with the British festival of arts, science, commerce and personal links which is underway in Japan. Already the festival has confirmed the rich vein of affection for Britain among Japanese people. Some 2 million of them have already visited festival events.
But, of course, there are the wounds from the past. Reference has been made in our debate this evening to the concerns of former prisoners of war and civilian internees. I am sure we all agree with the noble Viscount, Lord Slim, that we must never forget the dreadful suffering and sacrifices by those held in Japanese prison camps. The noble Viscount was right to remind us that we all owe a debt to the courage of those who fought, who died and who suffered appallingly at that time.
On taking office, the Government raised the subject with the Japanese Government and made clear the feelings which it still arouses in this country. My right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary, other colleagues and officials had intensive talks with their Japanese counterparts. The Japanese Government said that they fully appreciated the sensitivity of the matter, but stressed that the question of compensation had been settled by the 1951 peace treaty. When the Prime Minister visited Tokyo in January, the Japanese Prime Minister responded to our representations by making an official apology on behalf of his Government for the damage and suffering of the war. He repeated
These developments have been welcomed by the Royal British Legion and other organisations. Of course we understand and respect the views of those former prisoners for whom all of this is not enough, but we believe that it represents a significant step forward, as the noble Lord, Lord Moynihan, indicated.
As Derek Fatchett said in another place on 29th April, we will continue to raise these matters with the Japanese Government as occasion offers and we maintain close contact with all groups that represent former prisoners.
The noble Lord, Lord Moynihan, asked specifically about current legal advice on the reopening of the 1951 peace treaty. Whatever the rights or wrongs of the 1955 decision not to reopen the treaty, our legal advice is that it is not now in fact open to the Government to reopen the peace treaty, mainly because of the length of time that has elapsed.
However, I believe that there are other ways in which we can try to help. When the Prime Minister visited Japan in January, the Japanese Prime Minister announced a package for reconciliation. It included memorial visits to South-East Asia. The first of those trips is under way. The theme is remembrance and reconciliation. Groups of British and Japanese veterans will meet in Burma. There will be a chance for them to build friendships where once they were enemies. Central to this visit will be the joint memorial services in both British and Japanese cemeteries. We are very pleased that the visit is being organised by the Royal British Legion which has so much experience in arranging such trips. It offered to do so following its members' first ever and highly successful visit to Japan in March.
We have heard and discussed some of the many areas which constitute our special partnership with Japan today. There is much to celebrate when the Emperor and Empress of Japan visit Britain next week. I hope that they will be welcomed with warmth by the British people. There has been much written in the British press, and no doubt there will be a great deal more, about the tragic history of the war. We will never forget the sacrifices made by those who suffered in the Japanese prison camps. But there is also a time to look forward to the future, while never, ever forgetting the past.
I should like to end by quoting from the letter which the noble Viscount, Lord Trenchard, mentioned at the beginning of the debate, written by the noble and gallant Lord, Lord Bramall, to the Daily Telegraph last week. The noble and gallant Lord said:
|Next Section||Back to Table of Contents||Lords Hansard Home Page|