← Back to House of Commons Debates
Diego Garcia Military Base 2025-05-22
22 May 2025
Lead MP
The Secretary of State for Defence John Healey
Debate Type
Ministerial Statement
Tags
DefenceEconomy
Other Contributors: 28
At a Glance
The Secretary of State for Defence John Healey raised concerns about diego garcia military base 2025-05-22 in the House of Commons. A government minister responded. Other MPs also contributed.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Government Statement
For more than 50 years, the joint UK-US military base on Diego Garcia has been a launchpad to defeat terrorists and protect economic security. The Prime Minister signed a treaty with Mauritius guaranteeing full continued UK control of Diego Garcia for the next 99 years and beyond. This treaty secures operational sovereignty of this vital military installation, ensuring national security and maintaining the special relationship with the US. The base plays a crucial role in protecting trade routes, safeguarding against terrorist attacks, and providing global intelligence capabilities. Without this deal, legal rulings could lead to loss of control over Diego Garcia within weeks and make it inoperable within years. This agreement strengthens Britain's economic security by securing key military operations at less than 0.2% of the annual defence budget.
James Cartlidge
Con
South Suffolk
Question
The deal will cost UK taxpayers over £10 billion. Will the Secretary of State confirm how much will come from the Ministry of Defence budget? How would potential adversaries be informed about base operations under legal obligations?
Minister reply
The treaty guarantees full control over Diego Garcia for 99 years and beyond, securing operational sovereignty and national security at a cost less than 0.2% of the annual defence budget. The specific financial arrangements are detailed in the exchange of letters with Mauritius.
Peter Lamb
Lab
Crawley
Question
In the '60s and '70s, Labour and Conservative Governments removed the Chagossian people from their islands in the interests of national security. In response to written questions, the Foreign Office has confirmed that many certainties required for Chagossians to return have not been secured under this deal. How will you explain the moral basis on which the UK is once again ignoring their right to self-determination while we fight for it in Ukraine?
Minister reply
This negotiation was between the British and Mauritian Governments. We have worked to improve relations with Chagossian groups, but some support this deal as necessary for national security. I hope my hon. Friend will advocate strongly for the use of the trust fund and programmes we are putting in place to help the Chagossian community.
Lewes
Question
The process for agreeing this deal has been bumpy, with the Government failing consistently to provide clarity. Can you confirm what issues Chagossians raised during their meetings with Ministers and how these have been addressed in the deal? Also, will the House have an opportunity to scrutinise and vote on its ratification?
Minister reply
From this point, the full text of the treaty is before the House along with financial arrangements. The Chagossian community has been consulted and a new trust fund worth £40 million for their support in Mauritius is now established.
Alex Ballinger
Lab
Halesowen
Question
With our closest security partners welcoming this deal, why are the Conservatives playing politics with our national security?
Minister reply
We have kept the Americans informed and consulted them at all stages of negotiation. The US did not have a veto in these negotiations; it is our decision to make.
James Cleverly
Con
Braintree
Question
From which binding legal authority does the Secretary of State fear that jurisdiction may come to undermine the military operations on Diego Garcia?
Minister reply
The judgments from any international tribunal or court, such as the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, could compromise our ability to protect the electromagnetic spectrum used by sensors, radars, communications and intelligence functions.
Amanda Martin
Lab
Portsmouth North
Question
How will we be protecting the area around the islands?
Minister reply
The treaty includes a 24 nautical mile buffer zone—an exclusion zone, if you like—that allows us to control the seas and air around Diego Garcia. Additionally, there is an effective veto on any developments across the archipelago extending to at least 100 nautical miles.
Julian Lewis
Con
New Forest East
Question
Will the Secretary of State now give a direct answer regarding which court would be able to make a binding judgment against us on this matter?
Minister reply
The most proximate and potentially serious legal challenge comes from the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.
Anneliese Dodds
Lab/Co-op
Oxford East
Question
Will the Secretary of State confirm that this deal costs far less than other base deals while offering vastly superior strategic scale and value?
Minister reply
Yes, the deal will cost less than 0.2% of the defence budget compared to €85 million paid by France for their Djibouti base, yet it offers vastly superior strategic scale and value.
Al Pinkerton
LD
Surrey Heath
Question
Can those on the Government Front Bench assure us that when this deal comes back to the House we are not going to be asked to vote for a new round of colonial practice?
Minister reply
We deeply regret the way Chagossians were removed from the islands, but legal challenges would continue to bedevil the operation without the treaty. We have provisions in the treaty to support Chagossian communities.
Meg Hillier
Lab/Co-op
Hackney South and Shoreditch
Question
Does my right hon. Friend agree that some areas need deeper scrutiny?
Minister reply
I have a different view about how to deal with the challenge of scrutinising sensitive issues, but we must find a way to do so.
Andrew Murrison
Con
South West Wiltshire
Question
Could the Secretary of State explain in lay terms which parts of UNCLOS are responsible for what has happened?
Minister reply
Judgments from any international tribunal or court could compromise our ability to protect the electromagnetic spectrum used by sensors, radars, communications and intelligence functions.
Richard Tice
Reform
Boston and Skegness
Question
Does my right hon. Friend agree that the Conservatives’ new-found passion for the Chagos islands perhaps owes more to political opportunism than to any deeply held conviction?
Minister reply
I do, indeed. The deal we have struck is a good investment for Britain and ensures safety through joint operations with our closest ally.
Bernard Jenkin
Con
Harwich and North Essex
Question
Does the Government understand how introducing UN convention on the law of the sea and International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea as decisive factors in a binding ruling could impact the electromagnetic spectrum or our ability to use it in Diego Garcia?
Minister reply
The House will have plenty of opportunity to test and debate these issues, but I encourage those who were in government at the time to provide information on legal advice received.
Gordon McKee
Lab
Glasgow South
Question
Does the Secretary of State share my surprise that Opposition Members seem so intent on ignoring our allies, particularly regarding US support for this deal?
Minister reply
My hon. Friend makes a powerful point succinctly; the House and Conservative party should listen to it.
John Hayes
Con
South Holland and The Deepings
Question
Will he provide, where it does not compromise national security, all information and advice given on legal advice regarding the deal?
Minister reply
This House will have plenty of opportunity to test and debate these issues, but the right hon. Gentleman might start by asking his former colleagues who were in government at the time.
Bayo Alaba
Lab
Southend East and Rochford
Question
Will he expand on safeguards in the deal, particularly the 24-mile nautical exclusion zone and ban on foreign military presence, which guarantee full UK command of the base?
Minister reply
The provisions of the treaty guarantee rights of the UK in the 24-nautical mile zone around the islands and airspace above to patrol and control that airspace.
Neil O’Brien
Con
Harborough, Oadby and Wigston
Question
Under this deal, we are paying billions for our territory taken away from us. Can he explain why the Prime Minister is doing so?
Minister reply
This is a good investment for a unique capability that has played an essential role in protecting people at home and abroad.
Jim Dickson
Lab
Dartford
Question
Could he share with the House any threat assessments indicating that without guaranteed access to Diego Garcia, China could attempt to expand regional military presence?
Minister reply
Of course China wants to interfere or monitor what we do from the base; this deal helps protect the base and prevents it.
Jerome Mayhew
Con
Broadland and Fakenham
Question
Is he aware of a single case that is live under UNCLOS at the moment against the United Kingdom?
Minister reply
Within weeks, rulings are expected to start weakening our ability to control and maintain full operational sovereignty over Diego Garcia.
Mike Tapp
Lab
Dover and Deal
Question
Does he agree that if Conservatives stayed in government at the election, they too would have signed this deal for national security?
Minister reply
Clearly, they were trying to negotiate a deal; any Government elected in July would have faced securing this space for the long term.
James McMurdock
Reform
South Basildon and East Thurrock
Question
Given that this land was always going to be ours, who will benefit from it being ours for only 99 more years?
Minister reply
The British people and forces will continue to benefit; the deal extends our ability to control space for national security.
Deirdre Costigan
Lab
Ealing Southall
Question
Does he agree that this is a price worth paying, as it ensures country’s safety and security?
Minister reply
It helps protect our security at home; it strengthens forces abroad and reinforces special security relationship with the US.
Ben Obese-Jecty
Con
Huntingdon
Question
How will control and management of electromagnetic spectrum be reflected as per annex 1, paragraph 1, sub-paragraph b, clause iv?
Minister reply
I will have a word with my right hon. Friend the Chief Whip to discuss the detail.
Gregor Poynton
Lab
Livingston
Question
Is it not the case that the bluster and red faces from the Conservative party today is political hypocrisy, given their previous Prime Minister's stance?
Minister reply
I pay tribute to my hon. Friend who has a quote that I have not managed to get; he makes a very powerful point.
Solihull West and Shirley
Question
In the hypothetical scenario of a legal challenge to the deal, why would the Government not simply appeal?
Minister reply
The Chief Whip has a second volunteer for the Committee stage of this legislation! There is an accumulation of legal challenges that pose serious risks to the base's future operation. No responsible government can stand idle in the face of these threats; hence we decided on this treaty today.
Mark Ferguson
Lab
Gateshead Central and Whickham
Question
Does the Secretary of State agree that failing to do this deal would have been a dereliction of duty to our country and its Four Eyes allies?
Minister reply
Absolutely, we are supported by America, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and India on this deal. Our staunchest allies endorse it while adversaries who wish to harm us oppose it.
Luke Evans
Con
Hinckley and Bosworth
Question
If the Defence Secretary is worried about losing a court challenge, will he publish documents showing why he was advised that he would lose, or could he appeal if unsuccessful?
Minister reply
The accumulation of legal challenges poses serious risks to national security operations. No responsible government can stand idle; hence we acted decisively by doing this deal.
Shadow Comment
James Cartlidge
Shadow Comment
The deal is a total surrender of British territory due to a failure in negotiation and not out of legal necessity or military defeat. The Opposition criticises the cost of £1 billion over five years, which they argue would be better spent on national defence. They also highlight that the treaty requires informing Mauritius about armed attacks from Diego Garcia, raising concerns about potential leaks to adversaries. Cartlidge accuses Labour of failing to stand up for UK's interests and surrendering territory due to pessimistic legal advice.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy
About House of Commons Debates
House of Commons debates take place in the main chamber of the House of Commons. These debates cover a wide range of topics including government policy, legislation, and current affairs. MPs from all parties can participate, question ministers, and hold the government accountable for its decisions.