LONDON DEFIANT
By KENNETH LINDSAY, M.P.
ONDON was always a vulnerable target for aerial bom- bardment, but three weeks' experience has shown that it may become either an impediment to the main war effort or a proud and defiant challenge to the enemy. This depends not on its people but on its rulers.
I have known South-East London since boyhood, spent eleven years at a dockside school, and later lived in East London serving on a number of public bodies. This last week I have visitedtmany familiar places by day and night. Every- one knows that London has been bruised, but what an epic story of heroism and cheerfulness could be told! One thinks of the dogged gallantry of the A.F.S., of tireless officials and voluntary workers, of the unbeatable spirit shown by thousands of ordinary men and women. It was an odd sight to see a soldier or airman in uniform sitting among the huddled families in church crypts, wine vaults, trench shelters or under the bridges. Who now was in the front line? The padre A.R.P. warden guarding his flock by night, or the chaplain in the un- bombed camps elsewhere? The cockney was always adapt- able, but during these last weeks he has shown an even more remarkable quality, complete defiance in adversity. Londoners are settling down to face a new situation with a shrug and a smile, as exemplified by the East London pub which was bombed on one side during the night and which opened on the other side next day to serve lunch-time drinks. Such stories are legion.
But what of the Government's plans and organisations? It is plain now that, from the beginning of the war, policy with regard to home security, evacuation and education has suffered from lack of unified responsibility. For nine months we were anticipating an overhanging threat which failed to materialise; children went backwards and forwards from town to country; three artificial areas classified as evacuation, neutral and reception ceased to have any practical meaning; protection in the case of schools was afforded on a too academic view of aerial warfare; wide differences in shelter accommodation were allowed in the name of free local government.
The immediate and urgent problem, however, concerns the complicated system of London government. In addition to the twenty-eight Borough Councils with their limited powers, there exists the London County Council with its Public Assist- ance Department and network of schools and institutions. Side by side with it there is the Regional Commissioner's office,which Co-ordinates the work of all A.R.P. and A.F.S. stations. Shelter accommodation and local rebilleting is the work of Borough Councils. The Assistance Board deals with certain aspects of relief. Evacuation outside the Borough is the direct responsi- bility of the Ministry of Health. The proximity of the main Government Departments means that another and all-powerful authority, which of course is ultimately responsible to Parlia- ment and the nation, is taking a direct hand in dealing with the London problem. I have omitted to mention the Ministers of Food, Transport and Pensions, and the workings of the Metropolitan Water Board, not because they are unimportant, but because their responsibilities are less immediately obvious.
Once again the war has revealed serious friction in machinery of Government. Services which have been created to achieve Specific objects, such as the A.R.P., A.F.S. and other civil defence bodies, have not only functioned well within their own areas, but have lent themselves to co-ordination throughout London. No language could do justice to the devotion of the men and women in these services. The hospitals have been ready for months to deal with the inevitable casualties, and miracles have been worked under bombardment conditions. But when the fires have been overcome and the glass has been quickly swept away and the wounded and dying have been tended, a whole crop of human problems remain.
Take a typical devastated district. Hundreds, it may, be thousands, of people rendered homeless, because their homes have been either destroyed or made untenable. Each one is a human problem. Some friendless people may be lost or untraceable ; some have lost their livelihood, others, such as dockers, may be re-employed elsewhere ; some belong to the timid or jittery class and need removing ; others can find alternative accommodation locally, but want hot meals, because their women folk and local gas-supply have disappeared. These dre a few sample cases which must be settled promptly, if the high civilian morale is to be upheld.
At present there are a chain of rest-centres in schools and church halls, where the homeless can obtain a mattress at night and a hot meal and where children and adults can be registered for evacuation. There is no point in repeating that these centres were notoriously unready for the emergency in the early days, that distressed people had to wait for the mattresses and the meals and the buses. By now most of these things have been remedied, but it does not follow that any P.A.C. official is the right person to conduct a rest centre.
Indeed, the major criticism remains. There should be attached immediately to the excellent civil defence services a welfare officer whose job it is to diagnose all cases and pass them on quickly to the proper authority. Such a person might be either a P.A.C. official or a voluntary worker, who knows the district and has a genius for the job.
It is imponible to discuss shelter accommodation without considering at the same time a national evacuation policy. London is not a fit place for school children, and in any case very few are going to school, nor is it a proper place for mothers with young children or. for the aged. Voluntary evacuation has removed thousands Of people, but there must be reserved areas for the bombed and genuinely homeless. This means requisitioning every available room-space on a basis different from anything we have previously known. Women and children must be given priority, before soldiers are re-billeted in houses.
Meanwhile all persons essential to the conduct of business in London must be given a dry and warm place, where they can lie down at nights with the maximum of security and the minimum of noise. The majority of people prefer to be under- ground and the Finsbury trench shelters have shown what an enlightened Borough can do. But every spare basement, crypt and vault must be speedily adapted to the new situation. After security, ventilation and sanitation are the first essentials, but there must also be bedding and light and a responsible person in charge of each shelter. Here the other roles of a welfare officer become apparent. Once the essential amenities of shelter life have been secured, Londoners will do the rest. Already sing-songs and miniature concerts are taking place, as I have heard them in Stepney and Poplar. "We can take it" is a phrase which springs from thousands of Londoners. But let organisation match this unconquerable spirit. The time has come for central executive action. London needs its own democratic dictator. Why not bring Mr. Herbert Morrison back to his own job and let a business man run the Ministry of Supply?
London is bruised and scarred, but even in its travail it may remember that England is bigger than London, and that with all its beauty and age, much of it needed better building. Many Londoners will now discover England as the children have been doing these last months. When the Government has done its best, we shall all need an extra measure of patience and tolerance with each other, town and country, Londoners and provincials. We must never tolerate the words "homeless refugee" among English people on English soil.
Previous page
