Holocaust Memorial Day 2012

Lord Barwell Excerpts

Thursday 19th January 2012 Westminster Hall

[Mr Mike Hancock (in the Chair)]

We come to the debate to mark Holocaust memorial day. I am delighted—I am sure that the whole House is—that so many Members have decided to take part. The first Member to be called is Gavin Barwell.

[Gavin Barwell (Croydon Central) (Con)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Hancock. On 27 January—the 67th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau—the UK will, for the 12th time, celebrate Holocaust memorial day. I am very grateful to the Backbench Business Committee for granting this debate, which has become something of an annual tradition in Parliament in recent years. I am also grateful to all Members who have attended today.

With your indulgence, Mr Hancock, I shall start with an explanation. When I originally requested this debate, I was a lowly Back Bencher. Subsequently, I was appointed Parliamentary Private Secretary to the Minister of State, Department for Communities and Local Government, my right hon. Friend the Member for Tunbridge Wells (Greg Clark). I checked with the Backbench Business Committee whether that was a problem, and it said no. However, the Government have chosen a Minister from my Department to respond to the debate, so there is a technical issue. I am grateful to the hon. Member for Birmingham, Erdington (Jack Dromey) and to my Secretary of State, who have both agreed that, because the subject is wholly apolitical, there is no issue with me initiating the debate. I wanted to put that on the record from the start.

As all hon. Members will know, the holocaust was the systematic state-sponsored murder on an industrial scale of approximately 6 million of Europe’s pre-war Jewish population of 9 million by the Nazi regime and its collaborators. One million of those murdered were children. Of course, there were many other victims of the Nazi regime. In addition to those killed on the battlefield or by the bombing of civilian areas, millions of prisoners of war and civilians were brought to Germany to act as slave labour, and Romani were also killed.

There has been a great deal of historical debate about whether the holocaust is unique. Genocides have occurred before and, regrettably, they have occurred since. However, it seems that the holocaust is unique in the sense that it involved a modern industrial state turning all the energies of its bureaucracy towards the extermination of a single group of people, and it is entirely right that we commemorate that and learn the appropriate lessons.

In opening the debate, my job is briefly to set out the facts of what happened. Nazi ideology was based on a pseudoscientific racism that saw Jews as a race that was in mortal combat with the Aryan race for world domination. However long their families had lived in Germany, as far as the Nazis were concerned, Jews were aliens who could never be part of the community. The persecution of Jewish people began as soon as Hitler came to power on 30 January 1933. That year, a series of laws were passed that excluded Jews from key areas of public life, the civil service, medicine and agriculture. In 1935, the Nuremberg laws were passed, making it illegal for a Jew to marry or have sex with an Aryan, and stripping Jews of German citizenship. Violence against Jewish people and against Jewish property escalated, with Kristallnacht on 9 and 10 November 1938 being the most infamous example.

At that point, the Nazis’ plan was to deport forcibly all Jews from Germany and to try to convince the Governments of the United Kingdom and France to accept deported Jews to their colonies. However, it was the outbreak of the second world war that led to the holocaust, both because it put a much larger proportion of Europe’s Jewish population at the Nazis’ mercy and because it gave cover to the ultimate fulfilment of their racist ideology.

Western Poland—annexed-occupied by Germany in September 1939—contained about 2 million Jewish people before the war. Initially, they were forcibly relocated to ghettos. Conditions were appalling: for example, 30% of Warsaw’s population was forced to live in just 2.4% of the city. The ghettos were deliberately located in cities that were also railway junctions, so that, in Heydrich’s chilling words, “future measures can be accomplished more easily”.

The invasion of Russia in 1941 escalated the atrocities even further. The invading army was followed by four SS Einsatzgruppen, which were essentially extermination squads. At his trial at Nuremberg, the commander of Einsatzgruppe D, Otto Ohlendorf, described their work:

“The Einsatz unit would enter a village or town and order the prominent Jewish citizens to call together all Jews for the purpose of ‘resettlement.’ They were requested to hand over their valuables and shortly before execution to surrender their outer clothing. They were transported to the place of execution…immediately. In this way it was attempted to keep the span of time from the moment in which the victims knew what was about to happen…until the time of their actual execution as short as possible. Then they were shot, kneeling or standing, by firing squads in a military manner and the corpses thrown into the ditch. I never permitted the shooting by individuals, but ordered that several of the men should shoot at the same time to avoid direct personal responsibility.”

It is estimated that more than 700,000 Jewish people were killed in that way.

[Mike Gapes (Ilford South) (Lab/Co-op)]

I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman for securing the debate. He has referred to what happened when the Nazis invaded the Soviet Union. Is he aware that there are many people who, at the end of world war two, fled the Soviet Union and got false identities in other countries? Is it not important that we continue to make sure that those people, wherever they are and however old they are, pay for the crimes they carried out?

[Gavin Barwell]

That point is extremely helpful, because the end of that quote states:

“to avoid direct personal responsibility.”

One of the responses to what happened must be to ensure that everyone, wherever possible, is made to take responsibility for what they did.

On 20 January 1942, Heydrich convened a meeting to discuss

“the final solution of the Jewish question”.

At that meeting, figures were given for each country, including the United Kingdom, countries under German occupation, neutral countries and belligerents that Germany had not yet conquered. The Jewish population of Europe was to be deported to the east and either used as slave labour in concentration camps—the Germans had a phrase for that that translates as “destruction through work”—or killed in the gas chambers of new extermination camps. It is estimated that 1 million died at Auschwitz-Birkenau, 870,000 at Treblinka, 600,000 at Belzec, 360,000 at Majdanek, 320,000 at Chelmno and 250,000 at Sobibor.

I want briefly to touch on the emotional reactions of those who liberated the various camps, both the concentration camps and the extermination camps. For time reasons, I shall quote just three people. First, I shall quote America’s legendary broadcaster, Ed Murrow, who was with the US Third Army when it liberated the concentration camp of Buchenwald. He said:

“I have reported what I saw and heard, but only part of it. For most of it I have no words”.

A. R. Horwell was a German Jew serving as a doctor in the British Army who wrote to his wife following the liberation of Bergen-Belsen about how he was deeply moved to be part of a group

“where there is no sign of discrimination, and where the Jewish padres were the most honoured guests. It made me realise it again: it was worthwhile to be in this war, it is an honour and distinction to wear this uniform...I must restrain myself, for fear to become too emotional. I can’t help it, darling; it is a great thing to be back here after all these years—after all these immense sufferings inflicted upon us and our people, to be here with the victorious army...I am very happy tonight and sad at the same time. Happy, because I have survived, one of the few to see this day, and sad, because I am one of the few—so few”.

[Bob Stewart (Beckenham) (Con)]

I hope that my hon. Friend will forgive me for intervening, but I know Belsen relatively well. I want to remind everyone that it was not only people of Jewish origin who were exterminated in these camps; Gypsies and, indeed, officers of the Special Operations Executive, of which my mother was a member, were also exterminated.

[Gavin Barwell]

My hon. Friend makes his point very powerfully. Earlier, I tried to touch on the fact that the victims of Nazi atrocity were clearly many and varied.

Dr David Tibbs was serving with 13 Para, which was also involved in the liberation of Belsen. He had a slightly different reaction:

“At Belsen, I felt a curious elation. Looking at all these terrible things, I thought, ‘Here is the justification for this war, for all the lives we have lost, for everything we’ve been through’”.

A few people in our society today argue that war never achieves anything. I myself am an opponent of one of the conflicts we are engaged in at the moment. However, those words are a reminder that, sometimes, violence does achieve something. In this case, it stopped, far too late, a tremendous atrocity.

[Jack Lopresti (Filton and Bradley Stoke) (Con)]

I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing the debate. He spoke very movingly about the history and first-hand testimony. Does my hon. Friend share my dismay that the Iranian President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a repeated holocaust denier, was given a platform to address the UN anti-racism conference in Geneva in April 2009, and that he spoke from a UN platform again on this subject in 2011?

[Gavin Barwell]

I regret that fact. I am a great believer in free speech, and if people such as Mr Ahmadinejad wish to reveal just how foolish they are by denying things for which the historical evidence is overwhelming, I do not have a problem with that, but I do not believe the United Nations should have given him a platform to do so.

[Mr Lee Scott (Ilford North) (Con)]

I also congratulate my hon. Friend on securing this very important debate. Does he agree that, as time passes and there are fewer and fewer survivors from the camps and people who liberated them, the work of organisations such as the Holocaust Educational Trust—Karen Pollock and her team, who are with us today—is vital in teaching future generations exactly what happened, so that we can hope and pray that history does not repeat itself for people of any religion, colour or creed?

[Gavin Barwell]

I agree entirely with my hon. Friend and it is to that matter that I now turn.

To me, Holocaust memorial day is an opportunity to do several things: first, to remember the victims of the holocaust. Like, I imagine, many hon. Members, I had the opportunity, thanks to the Holocaust Educational Trust, to visit Auschwitz-Birkenau with students from my constituency as part of its excellent “Lessons from Auschwitz” project. It is probably the single most memorable thing I have done as a Member of Parliament. To those MPs who have not taken that opportunity, I encourage them strongly to do so. Indeed, the very idea of Holocaust memorial day came from a former Member of this House, who visited Auschwitz-Birkenau thanks to the Holocaust Educational Trust. One thing I learned from that visit was not just to regard people as victims. We started the visit in the Polish town of Oswiecim, looking at the gap on the high street where the famous synagogue used to be and looking at a whole part of Polish and European culture that was very nearly wiped off the face of the map, to remember what was there before and to not just see people as victims.

Holocaust memorial day is an opportunity to pay tribute to the survivors. Before I joined the House, I was a councillor in Croydon and was responsible for community cohesion. We have an event in Croydon on 27 January, when we commemorate Holocaust memorial day. I will never forget listening to a Croydon resident, Janina Fischler-Martinho, who is a holocaust survivor. She spoke to an audience of several hundred young people and they sat in rapt silence listening to what she had to say. One of the challenges we face is that sadly, the number of survivors is diminishing and we need to find a way to make sure that their story continues in the future. I know that the Holocaust Educational Trust is working with the sons and daughters of survivors to consider how they can take forward their parents’ testimony. Holocaust memorial day is also an opportunity to pay tribute to the bravery of those who sheltered Jews at great personal risk and to those who liberated the camps, and to remember the victims of other instances of genocide and racial prejudice—I would like to touch on that at the end of my speech.

Why is it important to remember? In an interview with The Daily Telegraph, the former Secretary of State for Education, Lord Baker of Dorking, whom I admire enormously and think has done a great deal of good for education in this country, said something that, on this occasion, I disagreed with:

“I would ban the study of Nazism from the history curriculum totally. I don’t really think that it does anything to learn more about Hitler and Nazism and the Holocaust. It doesn’t really make us favourably disposed to Germany for a start, present-day Germany...I think you study your own history first...I think children should leave a British school with some idea of the timeline in their minds—how it came from Roman Britain to Elizabeth II.”

I certainly agree with him about the importance of teaching the history of our country, but to me world war two and the holocaust is a vital part of that history. [Hon. Members: “Hear, hear!”] Many still share Churchill’s judgment at the time that Britain’s continued resistance in 1940, when we had no realistic prospect whatever of winning the war, was “our finest hour”.

In response to Lord Baker’s point about attitudes to modern-day Germany, it is important to learn that the holocaust happened not just because of the Nazis, but because people from many countries collaborated with them, and that no country has done more to address its historic crimes than Germany. Those are important points to make when teaching this material. Nor should the United Kingdom be too complacent. A Foreign Office official, Arminius Dew, wrote the following on 1 September 1944, during an impassioned controversy about allied policy in the face of increasing intelligence about the holocaust:

“In my opinion, a disproportionate amount of the time of the Office is wasted on dealing with these wailing Jews”.

That was a British Foreign Office official, and at the time appeals for the bombing of the approaches to Auschwitz were turned down.

What happened is a reminder of what human beings are capable of doing to each other, and not just by a small number of people. As Ian Kershaw wrote:

“The road to Auschwitz was built by hate but paved with indifference.”

Parish churches and the Interior Ministry supplied birth records showing who was Jewish. The post office delivered the deportation and denaturalisation orders. Government transport officers arranged the trains for deportation to the camps. Pharmaceutical companies tested drugs on camp prisoners. Companies bid for the contracts to build the crematoria. Detailed lists of the victims were drawn up on IBM Germany’s punch card machines, producing meticulous records of genocide.

[Mr John Spellar (Warley) (Lab)]

I congratulate the hon. Gentleman, as others have, on securing the debate. I join him and the hon. Member for Ilford North (Mr Scott) in congratulating the Holocaust Educational Trust on its work. Tomorrow I will be at Perryfields high school judging a contest for those who wish to go on its next trip to Auschwitz.

The hon. Member for Croydon Central (Gavin Barwell) describes the background to hate, and I agree with the wider way in which he has drawn that. Is not one of the most shocking facts about the genocide the amount of people deeply involved at senior and officer level who were graduates of universities, and in many cases medical graduates? Does that not indicate that such prejudice is not confined to the unthinking and illiterate, but that it spreads right the way through, and is a virus that has to be fought in every generation?

[Gavin Barwell]

I could not agree more with the right hon. Gentleman. Many of those who would have been judged at the time as educated and cultured people were responsible for the deaths.

It has happened since and it can happen again. Many of the attitudes and much of the ideology that I described at the outset—of people being “alien”—and which underpinned what happened are still prevalent in parts of the population here in the UK. In Croydon, there was a recent incident where a lady was filmed on a tram making the most disgraceful racist remarks about black passengers on the tram. As the local MP, I commented on it and condemned it. For the next two or three weeks, I was subject to a stream of vile e-mails from people who believe that anyone who is not white cannot be British. They accept that they are British citizens, but they do not accept that they are really British. They think that they are alien and do not belong here—that is the kind of language in the numerous e-mails I received. The same attitude applies in some of the ways the Muslim community in this country has been demonised in parts of the media—that there is something alien about that faith and that Muslims cannot be British.

Those attitudes persist in parts of our society. It is important not only that we remember what happened—remember those who lost their lives and the bravery of those who survived—but that we learn that lesson and continue to confront it. We have to face the fact that as human beings, we appear to be predisposed to being hostile to those who appear different. That means that we are bound to behave in that way, but we need to confront that innate prejudice and overcome it. That, to me, is the fundamental underlying lesson of the holocaust.

[Susan Elan Jones (Clwyd South) (Lab)]

The hon. Gentleman is making a very powerful and moving case. I was intrigued to see in a television documentary some of the propaganda material from the Hitler era. What shocked me was that it did not spew out hate; the propaganda was all about archetypal families—almost a sketch of happy families. It was quite cleverly done, almost saying, “This is what we are part of and therefore this other group must be part of the other.” I find that very chilling and dangerous—that is how the roots of prejudice can grow. We are in danger of that in this country—although obviously not to the same degree—when there is an insidious type of anti-Semitism, Islamophobia or whatever, and a sense that a particular group is different.

[Mr Mike Hancock (in the Chair)]

Order. A lot of people want to speak and if hon. Members make interventions, could they please make them short or wait until they have a chance to speak? Otherwise, it is very unfair to other hon. Members who have indicated that they want to speak. To make an intervention and just leave, for example, is not fair to those hon. Members who might not get the opportunity to speak, so can Members please bear that in mind? I will try to be as fair as possible to everyone, but if you make interventions please ensure they are short.

[Gavin Barwell]

The hon. Lady’s points speak for themselves. Taking on board what you said, Mr Hancock, I shall conclude.

It is important that we commemorate the holocaust, in memory of those who lost their lives and in order to learn the appropriate lessons for the future. If hon. Members wish personally to mark their commitment, they can sign a book of commitment on the Members’ staircase from Monday to Thursday next week between 2.30 pm and 4.30 pm. An event is being held on 23 January at 6.30 pm in the Atlee Suite.

I thank you, Mr Hancock. I also thank the Backbench Business Committee for granting this important debate, and all hon. Members present for attending to show their support for this important cause.

[Several hon. Members]

rose—

--- Later in debate ---

[Gavin Barwell]

With the leave of the House, I will reply just briefly. The hon. Member for Birmingham, Erdington (Jack Dromey) made both the points that I wanted to make, but I will briefly repeat them. I thank you, Ms Dorries, for the way you have chaired the second half of our proceedings, and in particular for allowing my hon. Friend the Member for Hendon (Mr Offord) to speak, which, if I may say so, was the second triumph today of common sense over rules.

Today’s debate showed Parliament at its best. I congratulate every right hon. and hon. Member who has spoken, but if others will forgive me, I will single out five hon. Members who reflected on particular personal experiences, which I thought lent a special force to their speeches. The hon. Member for Dudley North (Ian Austin) spoke about his family experience, my hon. Friend the Member for Beckenham (Bob Stewart) spoke about his time in Bosnia, and the hon. Member for Lewisham East (Heidi Alexander) spoke about visiting Auschwitz-Birkenau, on the same visit that I went on, as she said. My hon. Friend the hon. Member for Lancaster and Fleetwood (Eric Ollerenshaw) reminded me about Councillor Joe Lobenstein, whom I had the privilege of meeting several times. The story of his 64 grandchildren was wonderful. The Nazis tried to kill him and his family off—and here he is 70 years down the line, with all those descendants, who would not be here if the Nazis had been allowed to have their way. Finally, the hon. Member for Birmingham, Erdington referred to a trade unionist who changed his name because of the pain of the experiences he had been through.

What probably unites us all is that we do not want to live in a country where people cannot be honest about who they are—their faith, sexuality or background. Members on both sides of the House can unite around that, and the debate showed the House off very well. The hon. Gentleman was right to remind us of that period of British history of which we are all so proud, and of the fact that the Government then were a national Government. Churchill steals much of the limelight, but that Government brought together Atlee, Greenwood, Morrison and Bevin from the Labour party and Sinclair from the Liberals. All political parties can share in the achievement of the Government during the war.

The message we have sent out today is that we will not let the memory of what happened during the holocaust fade. We will go on confronting the evil of racism, because to do otherwise would be to betray the memory of the lives ripped away by the Nazi regime. Six million people: ask yourself, could there have been another Einstein or Kissinger among those 6 million? Whatever they would have gone on to be, 6 million individual lives were brought to an end because of the evil of racism, and that is what we are united in confronting. I thank all Members for attending the debate.

Question put and agreed to.