Morning:
8°c
The Evening Standard's campaign to end the scandal of children being buried in mass graves took a major step forward today when a key borough vowed to end the practice.
Southwark, which last year buried 72 babies in “paupers' graves” — more than any other London council — has promised to ensure they are laid to rest with dignity.
It becomes the 13th of the capital's local authorities to sign up to the Standard's charter calling for an end to Dickensian-style mass graves. Last week it emerged that a fox had been able to take a baby from a paupers' grave in Battersea New Cemetery because it was not properly sealed.
Southwark's decision means families too poor to afford a burial will no longer have to see their children placed in a pit containing up to 30 bodies — the most buried together in any London borough. It also brings to an end a hidden practice that has gone on for hundreds of years.
Graves will no longer be left with planks placed loosely on top, leaving bodies accessible to scavenging animals. Most importantly, parents will have a choice of cremation or burial site.
Paul Kyriacou, Southwark's executive member for the environment, said: “Following the Standard's exposé we have looked again at this practice. We have decided every parent should have the choice not to bury their child in a communal grave. We believe everyone deserves a dignified burial service.
“We face the challenge of having two major hospitals nearby and very limited space at our cemeteries, but this is too important an issue to ignore.”
Last week Mr Kyriacou had cited “tight budget constraints” as an excuse for failing to offer individual graves.
The boroughs responsible for 45 per cent of London's communal child and baby burials have now signed up to the charter. Wandsworth, which runs the cemetery where the fox seized the child, is one of them.
London's most affluent borough, Kensington and Chelsea, has still not signed up. The Conservative authority buries pauper babies 20 to a pit and in the last three years has conducted 16 pauper burials. It would cost the council less than £7,000 a year to adopt our proposals. Eight boroughs say they “need more time to seriously consider” our proposals.
So far, only Conservative-led Merton has confirmed it would not support our charter. Bexley and Greenwich declined to respond to our survey.
Who is adopting our charter?
Boroughs that have adopted our charter: Southwark (72 child/baby pauper burials last year); Wandsworth (37); Hammersmith & Fulham (3); Sutton (1); Ealing, Harrow, Lambeth, Havering, Westminster, Enfield, Croydon, Tower Hamlets, Richmond (0)
Boroughs that “need more time” to “carefully consider” our charter: Islington (33); Barnet (12); Hillingdon (8); Bromley (1); Hounslow, Redbridge, Haringey, Waltham Forest (0)
Boroughs that have yet to give a definitive response: Brent (38); Camden (33); Lewisham (12); Kensington and Chelsea (2); Hackney (1); Barking & Dagenham, Newham, Kingston (0)
Borough that has refused to support our charter: Merton (1)
* Bexley and Greenwich declined to respond to our survey
Reader views (9)
Hear Hear Mickinlondon !!
- Teresa Evans, Milton Keynes, 17/03/2011 17:32
Report abuse
Hear Hear Mickinlondon!
- Teresa Evans, Milton Keynes, 17/03/2011 13:10
Report abuse
I welcome the news that babies will be buried in a dignified manner, but I am curious to establish if the parents of these babies will be granted the ‘exclusive rights’ to the grave. The Exclusive Rights of Burial is a time granted in a grave and which varies from one local authority to another. Some authorities have reduced times granted to as little as 30 years when the law allows for 100 years. Owning the grant on a grave prevents anyone from disturbing the grave for the period of time that it is granted.
The local authority where I live claims that it has reduced times granted to 30 years because of the shortage of grave space and heavy maintenance costs. I believe that it is really about generating more income and that a public body should not be looking to make a profit.
The City of London cemetery has moved to reusing existing space in graves in consecrated land and reselling the graves as Heritage graves. To my knowledge the cemetery has not yet moved to adopt the ‘lift and deepen’ method in the public parts of its cemetery which a London Act allows them to do, but I imagine that it will not be long before it does so. When it does, likely other local authorities nationally will adopt the same practice as many suggest that grave space is running short.
- Teresa Evans, Milton Keynes, 17/03/2011 13:00
Report abuse
Merton Council signs up to Evening Standard Charter
Merton Council cabinet member for environment and leisure services Councillor David Simpson said: “Merton Council is always committed to a high standard of care. We are already fully signed up to the Charter for the Bereaved and wholly understand the need for sensitivity and dignity in these circumstances. We have reviewed our arrangements and are happy to sign up to the Evening Standard charter as well.”
- Bronwen Pickering, London, 24/03/2010 09:20
Report abuse
Helen,
That's a very good question. One of the "The Dispossessed" families mentioned elsewhere had an income wholly funded by the taxpayer of £ 38k per annum equivelent to a paid employment of £ 56k!
However let's us assume that it is anybody who cannot pay the the local council's rate for a plot, which is about £ 500 for a baby. In Soutwark that's probably a large percentage of the population; not that we've got that much cemetry land.
- Mark, South East London, 23/03/2010 09:22
Report abuse
What is the definiton of 'poor'.
- Helen, norwich, 22/03/2010 21:19
Report abuse
Cockell, the Leader of K and C spends that on wasteful and unnecessary trips to the US going Club all the way.
How vulgar and common the man is to gorge himself on £200 dinners for two and yet leave the poor so they cannot bury their children with dignity
- Hornton Street Hornet, London, 22/03/2010 16:50
Report abuse
I'd been wondering why so many of my ancestors were listed in London graves for 12. Now I can guess - but be reasonable, folks, the practice is hardly new. Public authorities guarantee decent burial... Er, just keep it 'decent' please.
- Steve, London, England, 22/03/2010 14:43
Report abuse
Name all local councillors on those local councils; that refuse to join the decent burial scheme for the poor etc.
The voting public; would then know who not to ever vote for again etc.
Any councillor that doesn’t do its duty to all the residents of their council controlled area, rich or poor; have no right to be any kind of civil servants at all.
So name all the Councillors on each council; that vote for paupers graves to continue.
Then let the public decide if they stay or go.
- Mickinlondon, london, 22/03/2010 13:09
Report abuse
