State funeral for last WWI veteran meets resistance

Imperial War Museum photo (1918) of British soldiers blinded by gas.

Iain Duncan Smith's cross-party plan for a state funeral for the last veteran of World War One has met resistance from the Government.  During a parliamentary debate yesterday Don Touhig MP, the veterans minister, argued that there was an "impossibility" of identifying the last survivor with any certainty.  He also told MPs that certain veterans opposed the idea: "A number of known World War One veterans have indicated that they, and their families, would not welcome any intrusion".  The Guardian reports that the government believes that "a national memorial service would be more appropriate".

Speaking in Westminster Hall, Iain Duncan Smith attempted to address Mr Touhig's objection and set the context for his appeal:

"Why make the proposal? It is, of course, not just about an individual but about the representative of an entire generation. The caveat is that the individual concerned and their family must agree to the proposal beforehand. As the Minister knows from our discussions, the fall-back position is that there should be some form of commemoration if the family do not wish to have a state funeral. Ultimately, we will be guided by their sense of what would be right.  I stress, however, that the priority position for me and many people to whom I have spoken about the matter is that we have a special occasion, and the most powerful way to commemorate it, even if it is not the only way, is through a state funeral. In the past, state funerals invariably have been granted only to members of the royal family or to those of the great and good, even if they were commoners, who rose in political or military terms. This state funeral would be unique: it would be for an ordinary person who had served their country, a representative of the peculiar generation that started a peculiar century—the 20th century, which was the century of the common man...

The suffering and the casualty lists show why such commemoration is necessary. Perhaps I could remind the House of some of the staggering figures. The number of British and empire soldiers, sailors and airmen who were mobilised and who served was just under 9 million, of which just under 1 million died and 2 million were wounded. I should remind the House that the bodies of 500,000—half the total who died in service—were never found.  Other aspects of the first world war that made it so peculiar were the nature and horror of it. Gassing occurred for the first time. Some 8,000 British and empire servicemen died directly and immediately as a result of gas attacks, but it is estimated—we will never know for sure—that some 200,000 of our servicemen suffered from wounds and long and lingering illness directly as a result of gassing, which did not happen in the second world war. Our servicemen were not alone: all around the world, the casualty lists were staggering."

Comments

[John Coles]

A tastelessly intrusive proposition.

[Louise]

I understand the theory and emotion behind this idea, but can't agree with it. There are too many variables such as how can we be sure that the last veteran to die is in fact the last veteran?

I would like to see how the new Veterans' Day develops as a suitable time to remember and pay our respects.

I'm also not sure that State Funerals are a suitable method of making a political statement. If we open it up to one group, how can we deny others eg the last WWII veteran, victims of terrorist attacks, soldiers killed in Iraq?

[Paul Bavill]

Some sort of commemoration of WW1 would be ideal. A tribute to all those who worked and fought through that conflict both by choice and by draft on all sides.

The state funeral, while a well intentioned idea, singles out one person's death as more important than others. If we insist on having a state funeral then one for the three bodies recently removed from the trenches at Ypres would be more appropriate.

Veterans Day should be avoided. We already have a veterans day - it's called Remembrance Sunday. If GB wants to champion Britishness then maybe he should give equal voice to all nations patron saint days or commonwealth day.

[Ted]

It appears a good idea at first sight but there has already been a far more moving ceremony in memory of all those who died for Britain in WWI

"In the morning Chaplains of the Church of England, the Roman Catholic Church and Non-Conformist churches held a service in the chapel before the body was escorted to Boulogne. The next day the coffin was placed inside another made of oak from Hampton Court sent over from England and wrapped in the flag that David Railton had used as an altar cloth during the War (known as the "Padre's Flag" which now hangs in St George's Chapel). Within the wrought iron bands of this coffin had been placed a 16th century crusader's sword from the Tower of London collection. The coffin plate bore the inscription "A British Warrior who fell in the Great War 1914-1918 for King and Country". The destroyer HMS Verdun, whose ship's bell now hangs near the grave in the Abbey, transported the coffin to Dover and it was escorted to Victoria Station by train where it rested overnight.

On the morning of 11 November the coffin was placed on a gun carriage drawn by six black horses and began its journey through the crowd-lined streets, first to Whitehall where the Cenotaph was unveiled by King George V, and then, followed by the King, members of the Royal Family and ministers of State, to the north door of Westminster Abbey.

It was borne to the west end of the Nave through a guard of honour of 100 holders of the Victoria Cross. After the Service the grave was covered by a silk pall which had been presented to the Abbey by the Actors' Church Union, with the Padre's flag over this. Servicemen kept watch while thousands of mourners filed past. The grave was closed on 18 November and the temporary stone over it was replaced by the present one on 11 November 1921."

[Andy Peterkin]

I agree with Ted. There is a danger that this might undercut the status of the Unknown Warrior.

[Alison Pimbert]

I believe that each veteran should be honoured privately and that after the last death, then a state funeral should be held with an empty casket to commenerate ALL WW1 veterans.

[Alison Pimbert]

I believe that each veteran should be honoured privately and that after the last death, then a state funeral should be held with an empty casket to commenerate ALL WW1 veterans.

[John Irvine]

My father and most of his friends were veterans of WWI. It was taken for granted by that generation.

They would have greeted this ridiculous proposal with utter disbelief. Why should the WWI veteran fortunate enough to have survived the war and lived the longest win a lottery for a free state funeral?

And what if, after the funeral, another surviving veteran turns up? It doesn't bear thinking about

[Ian]

The state funeral is much more than a funeral for the last WWI veteran, but a way of recognizing that a part of Canada has passed on. It was during WWI that Canada emerged from Britain and became a nation-and the funeral is part of realizing that men who participated in Canada's coming of ages are no more.