British Indian Ocean Territory — 26 Feb 2025 at 19:43

That this House regrets the reported multi-billion pound cost of the UK-Mauritius deal; notes the risk the deal presents to the UK’s strategic interests; further notes that it was a policy choice, not a legal necessity, and the concerns held by Chagossians over the Government’s failure to engage comprehensively with them; and calls on the Government to-

(1) lay before this House a chronology of the negotiations between the UK Government and the Government of Mauritius, since 4 July 2024;

(2) confirm whether the account of Prime Minister Ramgoolam given to the Mauritius National Assembly on 4 February 2025 is correct that (a) there has been a change in the sovereignty arrangements over Diego Garcia from those previously agreed, (b) changes have been made to the terms of the lease on Diego Garcia, and (c) changes have been made to the costs of the deal since it was first agreed and announced in the UK-Mauritius joint statement on 3 October 2024;

(3) confirm from which departmental budgets the costs of this deal will come and what they will be, including whether any of the proposed increase in defence spending, as announced by the Prime Minister on 25 February, will be used to pay for this;

(4) explain what involvement the Attorney General has had with this deal;

(5) set out the negotiating objectives established by the Prime Minister’s Special Envoy for BIOT negotiations and the reasons the Government sought to accelerate negotiations and conclude them before the Mauritian elections.

“was so bad that we said, no way!”

“For an initial period of 99 years, the United Kingdom will be authorised to exercise with respect to Diego Garcia the sovereign rights and authorities of Mauritius required to ensure the continued operation of the base well into the next century.”

“The fundamentals of the deal remain the same”.-[Official Report, 25 February 2025; Vol. 762, c. 618.]

“there have been changes. The British agreed. We insisted that the sovereignty issue is the crucial and the most important issue…We insisted that it be clear that we have complete sovereignty on the Chagos, including Diego Garcia. The British agreed to that and this has been changed.”

“The UK would retain all the rights and authorities we need to ensure the long-term, secure and effective operation of the base.”

“is initially for 99 years, but the UK has the right to extend that.”-[Official Report, 7 October 2024; Vol. 754, c. 46.]

“the agreement was for an agreement of 99 years, and then, unilaterally, the British would decide on an extension of that agreement for 40 years. We had no say in it. We disagreed completely! It cannot be that an agreement is signed for 99 years, and then the British on their own would decide that they will renew the agreement and we have no say in it.”

“The extension has to be agreed with both parties. It cannot be unilateral from the British. And I am glad to inform the Leader of the Opposition that the British have agreed to that also.”

“can be extended if both sides agree. We will have the right of first refusal, meaning it can’t be given to any other country at the end of the treaty without us first agreeing.”

“fundamentals of the deal remain the same”,-[Official Report, 25 February 2025; Vol. 762, c. 618.]

“we also wanted to do front loading; some of the money had to be front loaded,

“and that also is being agreed to”.

“There have been some changes to the financial arrangements to enable a limited element of frontloading, but the overall net present value of the treaty payments (which accounts for the impact of indexation) has not changed since”.

“is false and significantly exceeds the quantum.”

“There will be no payments unless and until the deal is struck.”

“ensure the continued effective operation of the joint UK/US military base on Diego Garcia”.-[Official Report, 3 November 2022; Vol. 721, c. 27WS.]

“How can the base-which serves as an indispensable naval, air, and intelligence asset-be more secure under the sovereignty of another nation, rather than under our own?”

“playing silly games with numbers.”

“The ITU cannot challenge the UK’s use of civilian or military spectrum.”

“Surrendering sovereignty over the Chagos Islands would be an irresponsible act, which would put our strategic interests-and the interests of our closest allies-in danger.”

“should shelve his Chagos Islands deal-it is peripheral to the UK’s current security challenges and the money could be better spent on defence.”

Debate in Parliament |