Why was it?

[fannum]

I have been under the impression that the terms of Lend-Lease, especially with Britain due to the uncertain politics, required that those materials be paid for at some later date ... if they survived. With the anti-war, anti-Churchill Labour Govt led by Clement Attlee in power after July 1945, not only were they intent on erasing all aspects of the war, but it seems likely that by immediately destroying the American weapons, they likely could claim they had no debt.

I do know that the US bases, machinery, supplies and material were confiscated as soon as possible by the Socialistic Labour party minions, and parceled out to their supporters. Many accounts of the era indicate the black market became much more active post war than during the conflict under the extreme rationing that lasted well into the '50s, and imbedded many consumption taxes onto the citizens which endure to this day.

We were in Europe in the '50s, and rationing was rampant for food, clothing, petrol and rubber even then. Many Brits were wearing GI uniforms as their working clothes ... from all the services.

 

[SaparotRob]

I have been under the impression that the terms of Lend-Lease, especially with Britain due to the uncertain politics, required that those materials be paid for at some later date ... if they survived. With the anti-war, anti-Churchill Labour Govt led by Clement Attlee in power after July 1945, not only were they intent on erasing all aspects of the war, but it seems likely that by immediately destroying the American weapons, they likely could claim they had no debt.

I do know that the US bases, machinery, supplies and material were confiscated as soon as possible by the Socialistic Labour party minions, and parceled out to their supporters. Many accounts of the era indicate the black market became much more active post war than during the conflict under the extreme rationing that lasted well into the '50s, and imbedded many consumption taxes onto the citizens which endure to this day.

We were in Europe in the '50s, and rationing was rampant for food, clothing, petrol and rubber even then. Many Brits were wearing GI uniforms as their working clothes ... from all the services.

 

[yulzari]

I have been under the impression that the terms of Lend-Lease, especially with Britain due to the uncertain politics, required that those materials be paid for at some later date ... if they survived. With the anti-war, anti-Churchill Labour Govt led by Clement Attlee in power after July 1945, not only were they intent on erasing all aspects of the war, but it seems likely that by immediately destroying the American weapons, they likely could claim they had no debt.

I do know that the US bases, machinery, supplies and material were confiscated as soon as possible by the Socialistic Labour party minions, and parceled out to their supporters. Many accounts of the era indicate the black market became much more active post war than during the conflict under the extreme rationing that lasted well into the '50s, and imbedded many consumption taxes onto the citizens which endure to this day.

We were in Europe in the '50s, and rationing was rampant for food, clothing, petrol and rubber even then. Many Brits were wearing GI uniforms as their working clothes ... from all the services.

The arrangement was that all surviving lend lease material was to be returned to US control or destroyed. By October 1945 pretty much all the British army Sherman tanks were given back and naval aeroplanes dumped at sea for example.

Once the material including general stores was delivered to US bases it became a US decision what they would do with them. If retained by Britain it was at a cheap rate but paid in dollars. The US had sucked up all the British US dollar holdings long before the US was forced to enter the war. As much as possible was given back to US ownership or destroyed as the US preferred. The US could then decide if it would have it scrapped, thrown away, returned to the US or given to allies. When the US sold stuff off it was mostly at public sales and cheaply so much clothing etc. was bought in large batches by surplus dealers who then sold them off to the public.

The democratically elected (by a landslide) British Labour government did not confiscate any US property. It retained and paid for some crucial items but as few as possible as it needed any dollar resources to try feeding the population. Which was a difficult thing to do at the time. Hence the reduction in civilian rations to below wartime levels. Bread, for example, was never rationed during the war but was post war.

Of course assorted US bases in Britain which had been used by US forces such as airbases were given back but the land had always been in British ownership. Hence assorted US airfields in Britain were always RAF owned. Thus RAF Lakenheath etc.

Any subsequent sales of the land and retained US kit was by public sale and the proceeds passed on to the Treasury as part of the government income. To 'parcel the out to their supporters' would be an illegal and criminal action. Clement Attlee was a serving officer in the Great War as a Major doing his duty to King and Country and a honourable and modest man. In the midst of all this and world events the government followed through with it's determination to establish a free at point of use public health system paid for through taxation whereby medical care was given against the need of the patient not their wealth. I have never voted Labour but staunchly support their achievement in this. Even if it was at first a Liberal party policy.

The US had records of what was supplied and whether it was used up in wartime service as did Britain. The bill was agreed between the governments and continued to be paid off into the 21st century and only recently completed.

I am sure that black market 'spivs' etc. were as active in the period as petty criminals have always been but not a major issue.

In summary, the wind up of lend lease to Britain was overall planned and carried out remarkably quickly without illegal nor questionable practices. There were difference of opinion in the accounts between the respective government of course but agreed through negotiation and a payment plan agreed.