by David
David continuously lobbied the various state councils of the Ex-POW Association, informing them of what the committee was planning and what it expected of the Federal Council. Everyone knew what was happening. The committee was determined to succeed. Even at this early stage, as a result of the publicity and their committee members’ letters, applications began to trickle in, along with donations to the cause.
By the end of April, there had still been no response from the Federal Council. The committee resolved to take the initiative and hurry things along a bit. They sent a document with much information to all the main office-holders of the Federal Council and all the state councils. They also requested that information be published in Barbed Wire and Bamboo, the official magazine of the Ex-POW Association. The article never appeared; David was sure that the Federal Council had blocked it.
I figured that if the members of the Federal Council were unsure of how to go about their business, with regard to the claim for reparations, then we should set them right! I reminded them again of our activities and enclosed copies of everything they needed to understand our position. Even at this stage, I was quite willing to hand the whole kit and caboodle over to the Federal Council, if this was what they wanted, but I didn’t believe it was.
I knew that the state representatives on the Federal Council, including George Beard and Clarrie Wilson from the Queensland Council, were still voting with Weary at the Federal Council meetings. I’m bloody sure they had their eyes on other prizes; they just wanted to keep sweet with their pals in the government. I knew that many of the office-bearers in the various state councils and the Federal Council had received government awards – usually as a result of proposals from other state or Federal Council members. No doubt all were well deserved, but I could not help wondering if a sense of obligation kept them from supporting an organisation whose actions tended to embarrass that government by continually insulting its chief trading partner.
As a result of the Reparations Committee members’ publications in various newspapers, they gained a great deal of feedback and were able to gauge the general feeling for their cause. Bruce Ruxton wrote that ‘support for the reparations committee at RSL meetings has been overwhelming’. J. L. Fitzgerald, the secretary of the Victorian Ex-POW Association, wrote: ‘I personally fully support your effort, and will do everything possible to bring about a satisfactory result.’ He was from Weary’s own branch. Similarly, George Morgan, President of the Wollongong branch, wrote that ‘you have my fullest support and again I thank you for the great work achieved’.1
But of course there were also some detractors. Jim Boyle, secretary of the Federal Council, wrote to Ralph Coutts, secretary of the Queensland Council, saying, ‘I think that their [the Reparation Committee’s] enthusiasm far outstrips their discretion but let’s wait and see what transpires’.2 By far, however, the feedback was positive.
Between early June and the end of November 1987, there was frequent correspondence between officials of the Reparations Committee and both the Queensland State Council, on the one hand, and the Federal Council, on the other. The main protagonists in these discussions, at either end, were David and Sir Edward ‘Weary’ Dunlop.
In a series of letters, Weary argued – mostly in exasperation, judging from their tone – that ‘there is a repugnance among many members about approaching the Japanese on this matter’. He stated categorically: ‘Do not raise the hopes of unfortunate people by premature glowing newspaper articles about receiving reparations money . . . It is a lightweight approach to seek reparations without Government support . . . It would be too difficult to collect and collate claims without Government participation and support.’
He even seemed to be unwilling to take any action to find out what the rank and file felt about claiming reparations: ‘We should let the Canadians do the hard work and see what happens . . . Too many years have passed to make a claim now . . . Just leave it to the states to vote yes or no.’ The final blow for the Reparations Committee came when Weary informed it that ‘South Australia, Victoria and New South Wales are all against the proposal and West Australia needs more time before making a decision.’3
The Reparations Committee members were very disappointed with Weary’s comments, but David argued back with polite enthusiasm. ‘We can’t let the Canadians down,’ he wrote. ‘We too should do some of the heavy lifting . . . My committee believes that any problems of communication and funding can be overcome by good leadership and by being single-minded of purpose . . . We do not think that our costs will diminish through ongoing delay.’
The committee members were shocked by some of Weary’s comments, and David’s responses conveyed this:
We were surprised that a “repugnance” exists among ex-POWs in respect to this claim because our enquiries reveal the exact opposite . . . Some German war criminals are only now being brought to justice in Europe so in no way are we behind in our actions . . . You will doubtless agree that all ex-POWs practiced optimism to see us through our darkest years, so surely optimism in this matter is more likely to bring a successful conclusion.
David also included what he considered practical advice in his responses: ‘Let us consider motions from the branches without delay and encourage members to express views freely and without influence . . . [We should] conduct a referendum using a coupon in Barbed Wire and Bamboo that would cost nothing.’ Finally, he added, ‘I hope that I am mistaken in thinking that individual thoughts and feelings of the executive are taking precedence over the needs and wishes of the rank and file.’4
Despite these practical suggestions by the Reparations Committee, Weary’s final communication on the matter was military in tone and straight to the point:
State Branches were asked to vote and they have done so . . . Please take note that any further action by you or your committee in relation to the question of reparations which involves this association or its Branches throughout Australia must cease forthwith.
By order of the Federal Council.5
Now David’s back was really up. It was like the 1986 conference on the Gold Coast all over again. Most of the state executives were led by men of the same mind as Weary. The rank and file of the association had basically been ignored.
Some people in these circumstances might have been persuaded to give up, but the response just made David and his committee more determined than ever. They could not accept that they ‘must cease forthwith’. The mood at the next Reparations Committee meeting was dark.
‘Who the hell do they think they are?’ one member asked.
‘Are we still in the bloody army?’ said another. ‘Is this an order from Brigade Command?’
‘Fuck ’em! Let the mutiny begin!’
David had never kowtowed to any officer while he was in the army, and he was not about to start now. He could not understand why Weary, who had looked after his men so well when they were prisoners – and indeed had suffered alongside them – could possibly think of letting these bastards off the hook now that they had a chance to do something about it. David was sure that most POWs felt as he did; the general enthusiasm for the reparations movement proved it.
David had got in touch with Bill Holtham, the chairman of the Japanese Labour Camp Survivors Association in Britain. He had informed David that in Britain they too had a great deal of opposition from the headquarters of their association. Bill was sure it was because many of them had been awarded honours of one sort or another from the Queen; therefore they simply refused to support anything that would upset the government.6
David had been wondering for a while whether this was indeed the case with the Federal Council of the Australian Ex-POW Association.
When we got that reply from Weary telling us to ‘cease forthwith’, I saw red. I could feel all the old hatreds and the anger come flooding back. I really thought we had been positive and had responded to his points calmly and reasonably; to be ordered to ‘cease forthwith’ was unbelievable!
Any
how, we stayed polite. We should probably have written back saying ‘stick it up your arse’ or something similar, but we didn’t. We just said that we would carry on with the authority from our own Gold Coast branch and the Queensland State Council. I did make some comment about him not being able to read properly. And then, would you believe it, we had another order telling us once more that we ‘must cease’. So that was it. We just ignored him after that.
The Reparations Committee met and discussed at length what they would do from here on. They were agreed that the rank and file of the association, except for those in Queensland, had not yet had a say in all of this. Secondly, they knew that there would be many ex-POWs of the Japanese who were not members of the association but who would be eligible to apply for reparations money. The obvious solution was simply to appeal to ex-POWs and their families directly. They also reckoned that so long as the Reparations Committee kept up its pressure, the state councils would eventually come around.
On 19 June 1988, the Queensland State Council of the Ex-POW Association passed the following official motion:
(a) That a committee be formed to take all the steps necessary on behalf of this Council to prepare and submit a claim to the United Nations Sub Committee on Human Rights, to be called the Queensland Reparations Committee.
(b) That the Committee already appointed by the Gold Coast Branch, namely D.W. Barrett, Chairman, P. I. Collas, Secretary and G. Stevenson be authorised to act as the Queensland Reparations Committee with power to co-opt other members to assist.
(c) That the Queensland Reparations Committee be authorised to raise funds to meet all the expenses of taking the necessary action, such funds to be controlled by the Gold Coast Branch in a separate account under the control of its treasurer.
(d) That the said Committee report to this Council at its regular
meetings and from time to time as requested as to progress made.7
By this motion, the Reparations Committee was empowered and expanded considerably. They now had the necessary authority to pursue their claim on the Japanese government through the United Nations.
We redoubled our efforts and used every means possible to publicise the mission. It was a terrific committee at this time. We got the addresses of every Ex-POW Association branch, every Battalion Association and every RSL club. We wrote articles to be published in every magazine. I got on to all my old mates at Yaffa who had close connections with all the newspapers. We advertised the fact that every ex-POW (Japan) could apply for reparations money, provided that he complete a form, and we let it be known that we would also accept donations.
Soon the completed forms came rolling in, along with their $10 registration fee. Usually an additional donation was included too.
In October 1988 the Federal Council of the Ex-POW Association appointed a new executive. The president was now Bill H. Schmitt, and with this change came the acceptance of the Reparations Committee.
David received a letter dated 26 October 1988 from Clarrie Wilson, who remained the Queensland delegate to the Federal Council. Wilson explained that the Federal Council now accepted the fact that the Reparations Committee was under the control of the Queensland Ex-POW Association; it was thus entitled to continue its claim for reparations from the Japanese. Furthermore, they could now have access to the association’s magazine, Barbed Wire and Bamboo.8
At this time, a mate of mine in the real-estate industry was selling blocks of land on Russell Island off the Gold Coast. I asked him if I could have a good block and he said sure, and he quoted me a very attractive price. ‘No, no,’ I said. ‘I need it for free, and I’m going to raffle it.’ I told him not to worry, that there would be so much publicity, Australia-wide, that he would have to buy more development land to take advantage of the demand. I got the block for free.
The newly renamed Australian Reparations Committee was well on its way.
Chapter 19
The Health of the Ex-POW
The Reparations Committee was not David’s only interest at this time. For many years, he had been concerned by the plight of fellow ex-POWs who, unlike him, had been unable to make a good life for themselves on their return from the war. Many were heavy smokers or drinkers, or both.
David was convinced that their failure to secure their futures was largely due to the suffering, both physical and mental, that they had endured as prisoners of the Japanese. Many men had died young, often from afflictions exacerbated by alcohol or from the residual effects of diseases suffered during their imprisonment. The Australian government’s Department of Veterans’ Affairs, David believed, had failed to recognise that the plight of these men was as a result of the service they had given to their country, and not through any fault of their own.
David’s aim was to secure improved legislation that would look after ex-POWs of the Japanese, and that would provide them with pensions or disability payments. In the mid-1980s, these pensions were very difficult to get; the ex-POWs and their medical advisers had overcome almost impossible hurdles to qualify. In David’s view, all ex-POWs should receive the maximum pension. He had been able to obtain this for himself, but it had been a long and hard battle. He now resolved to help others in this endeavour.
He was not alone in this, since all the ex-POW associations across the nation were also fighting for this cause. Chief among the proponents was Weary Dunlop. In late 1987, he had written to Prime Minister Bob Hawke and explained very clearly what the situation was for an ex-POW (Japan).1
David was not a doctor, as Weary was, but he had always had a great interest in medicine. He was as keen as anyone to get the best possible deal for his fellow veterans. He and Weary were of exactly the same mind on this subject. Typical of David’s efforts was a letter he sent to the Minister for Veterans Affairs, Ben Humphreys, in May 1989:
Dear Mr. Humphreys
Australia is a reasonably rich, productive and probably one of the best-fed countries in the world today. It is not surprising that chronic deficiency diseases and their residual effects are rarely diagnosed in this country . . .
Seeing thousands of Australians with far-advanced acute and chronic deficiency diseases is an experience unknown to most Australian physicians, unless they were so unfortunate as to have been incarcerated in the Orient when the Japanese Imperial Army overran the Far East . . . Australian physicians are often difficult to convince that the former prisoners have sustained permanent and service-connected disability as a result of wartime experience.
This experience began in 1942 for those Australian troops who were stationed in Malaya and Singapore . . . Hence began every gradation of acute dietary deficiency disease known to medical science . . .
In the next forty months, thousands of Australian and other Allied prisoners died in Prisoner-of-War camps throughout South East Asia and Japan as a result of starvation, disease, overwork and the brutality of their guards. Those who survived were scarred for life and in most cases their life expectancy was shortened by many years.
The ‘typical’ prison camp diet varied little from day to day. At the very best, the diet composed a poor grade of rice and watery greens, a half full cup of thin rice gruel or pap (about 8 oz or 160 calories) twice a day was standard. The rice was of the polished variety, containing much foreign material such as maggots, weevils and dirt. There were days when no food was issued at all. Meat of dubious origin would supplement the diet from time to time, no more than a few grams of protein for each prisoner.
During the first few months of captivity [at Changi] a number of prisoners died each day and were buried in common graves. After that, prisoners were permitted to purchase extra food from a small canteen, however this was limited. Some of the healthier prisoners planted small vegetable gardens, but they had to guard them carefully since vegetables frequently disappeared before they were ready.
Most of the prisoners suffered from amoebic or bacillary dysentery, or both, consequently their bodies could absorb very little of the food they were abl
e to get. Prisoners on working parties were fortunate because they could steal extra food.
After the liberation of Allied Prisoners-of-War in 1945, an adequate diet supplemented by the required vitamins and minerals rapidly improved most of the acute symptoms, but many of the individuals who were prisoners of the Japanese of 6 months or longer (most 3½ years) were left with one or more . . . permanent residual effects.
After returning home, many of the former Prisoners-of-War vowed they would never ‘go without’ again. They over-ate, over-smoked, over-drank, over-medicated and just as detrimental to their health, under-exercised . . . They preferred diets rich in fats, cholesterol and salt, and they drank lots of coffee.
Unfortunately, the many ex-Prisoners who have chain smoked since the end of the war have complicated their residual diseases with tobacco-related diseases . . . Some have become chronic alcoholics, further damaging their brains, hearts, livers, stomachs and nervous systems. A few became addicted to drugs.
One sad result of these added complications is that some former Prisoners-of-War have difficulty persuading the Veterans’ Administration that their disabilities are service connected. Most of the ex-prisoners are suffering from one or more of the residual conditions and are fully entitled to disability under the appropriate Act, yet cases are still being brought to the attention of the DVA where such individuals have been unable to convince the Department of the validity of their applications . . . As a result, their post war death rate is up to seven times higher than other war veterans’.
It is the considered opinion of eminent and medically qualified ex-Prisoners-of-War that anyone who was a Japanese Prisoner-of-War for 6 months or longer, who survived the trials and tortures of imprisonment in the Orient, should be considered for disability pensions.