-
Question
The MP asked if the Government's policy is to rush through their Chagos deal before President Trump’s inauguration, questioning its respectfulness towards the US Administration. He also requested transparency on the cost of renting back the military base and urged for a pause in ratification until new governments are settled.
Minister reply
The Minister responded by acknowledging previous Conservative Government negotiations but stated that a Labour Government concluded them successfully for national security reasons. He confirmed ongoing dialogue with US and Mauritian friends while respecting legal limitations on direct engagement with the incoming US Administration. The Minister emphasised operational security concerns, refusing to disclose specific financial details regarding government-to-government payments.
-
Question
The MP asked about further representations made to both international partners to ensure their support for the base’s legal status and the centrality of Chagossians' voices in future arrangements. He also noted President-elect Trump's reservations and Prime Minister Ramgoolam's review into the treaty.
Minister reply
The Minister acknowledged the significance of securing Diego Garcia's operation for UK and US national security interests, welcoming Dr Ramgoolam’s commitment to completing negotiations as stated in his letter to the Prime Minister. Jonathan Powell was mentioned to have visited Mauritius recently to advance this process.
-
Question
We are deeply disappointed with the way the negotiations have unfolded, particularly given the recent doubts expressed by Mauritius. The Chagossian voices need to be heard more clearly in future talks. Will the Government commit to meaningful opportunities for parliamentarians to examine the treaty proposals before signing?
Minister reply
The normal process for treaty ratification will be followed, allowing for full parliamentary scrutiny after signature. My colleague Stephen Doughty is meeting Chagossian communities and this dialogue will continue.
-
Question
Will the operations of the UK-US base on Diego Garcia continue unaffected by the terms of the deal? What about our commitments to the Falkland Islands, Gibraltar, and the rights of their people?
Minister reply
The Falklands and Gibraltar remain British as long as they wish. The deal secures the future of the UK-US base on Diego Garcia well into the next century with US support.
-
Question
Is the new American President's approval more important than security concerns? What prevents China from putting listening outposts on other islands that could compromise Diego Garcia’s security?
Minister reply
Specific arrangements in the treaty prevent any foreign power from deploying security apparatus or forces on the islands. The US has confirmed support for this deal.
-
Question
Before further dialogue takes place, should the Government fully engage with Chagossian community representatives in Crawley and elsewhere?
Minister reply
My colleague Stephen Doughty has met a range of Chagossian representatives and will continue these dialogues. He would welcome conversations to ensure this dialogue is as comprehensive as possible.
-
Question
Why the rush to sign the deal? Should not the House debate the agreed text in public before signing it? Are there informal discussions with the incoming American Administration?
Minister reply
This process started years ago. Eleven rounds of negotiation have taken place, securing a deal that supports the UK-US base on Diego Garcia well into the future. The deal will come to the House for scrutiny and vote.
-
Question
Why rush this agreement when two of three partners now have doubts? How does it reconcile national security with Chagossian human rights?
Minister reply
When the deal is signed, it will come before the House for scrutiny and judgment. The SNP’s record on national security gives them no platform to criticise this deal.
-
Question
What specific doubts do Mauritius' new regime have about the deal? Is it a desire for more money?
Minister reply
It is normal for any new Government to review deals made by their predecessor. When they look at the details, they will see that the US security apparatus backs this deal.
-
Question
Why not have a referendum with Chagossians to determine sovereignty over Diego Garcia? Is this a rotten deal for everyone involved?
Minister reply
Whipping up uncertainty about the Falklands' future is unhelpful. The deal secures the UK-US base on Diego Garcia well into the next century, securing our national interests.
-
Question
What will be the size of the exclusion zone around Diego Garcia to protect US and UK interests from foreign interference?
Minister reply
The treaty sets out security arrangements preventing foreign nations from deploying forces or apparatus on the outer islands. Mauritius did not join China’s belt and road initiative, maintaining a strong relationship.
-
Question
The Minister says that the outgoing Biden Administration in the US are keen on the deal, which may or may not be the case, but the British public plainly are not—for good reason—and they see the payment of a dowry to Mauritius as rubbing salt into the wound. If he is not prepared to comment on the quantum that he has in mind, will he at least explain the structure of the costings he is applying to come to the figure that he wishes to give Mauritius for taking on these islands?
Minister reply
I thank the former Minister for his question. As he served in the Department that I now serve in, he will know that it is normal to reveal the operating costs for overseas bases, but that we do not—he did not and we do not—reveal the Government-to-Government payments. That was standard procedure for his Government and every Government before, and it remains the policy of this Government. This deal secures the future of the UK-US base, and I am hopeful that when the details come out, he will be able to understand why it secures that for so long, and hopefully he will be able to back it.
-
Question
The Minister has said that he is not willing to give details of the financial arrangement, although he will be aware that the Mauritian Prime Minister has described the deal as a sell-out. Can he at least give an assurance that the Government will not commit to giving yet more money to get the deal through before the new US Administration arrives in January?
Minister reply
We think that this is a good deal. When the details come out, others will be able to make their judgment, but I think they will conclude that it is a good deal. It secures the future of the UK-US base on Diego Garcia, which was the overriding objective when the right hon. Gentleman’s party was in power. The Conservatives set that objective, and we are glad that this deal secures the future of the base well into the next century. That is an important step for UK and US national security.
-
Question
Will the Minister set out how he intends to implement safeguards against China establishing military capabilities and surveillance capacity in the British Indian ocean territories?
Minister reply
That is an important question, and one that I responded to a few answers ago. Let me reassure the hon. Gentleman that safeguards in the treaty will detail that no foreign security forces will be able to set up on the outer islands, providing that security perimeter around Diego Garcia that we and our US allies have sought. This is a good deal because it secures not only the future operation of the base but the future security around the base. I am hopeful that when the details come out, he will be able to see that for himself.
-
Question
I return to a question asked but not answered this afternoon. If as a result of the review the Mauritian Government demand more money, will the Government pay up in order to save face?
Minister reply
I am confident that this is a good deal. The Mauritian Government will look at the deal that has been signed and see that it is a good one. Our US friends know that it is a good deal, and anyone looking at it in future will see that it is a good deal because it achieves our No. 1 objective of securing the UK-US base on Diego Garcia well into the next century.
-
Question
The shadow Secretary of State, my hon. Friend the Member for South Suffolk (James Cartlidge), alluded to the presumptive nominee Marco Rubio’s comments that the deal represents a serious threat to US national security. Does the Minister agree?
Minister reply
All the representatives of the US security apparatus who have seen the detail of the deal back it. It secures the future of the base and it allays US fears around the future of the base. There has been some barking from the Opposition Front Bench about this, so it is important to say that the base on Diego Garcia is not currently secure for the long term. There are questions over its long-term sovereignty, and people are building support against our sovereignty claim. This deal secures the long-term operation of that base well into the next century.
-
Question
Having been one of many in this House to have vehemently opposed the ceding of the Chagos Islands without consulting the residents, and having stood in solidarity with those who opposed it, I am anxious to ensure that the Americans take control. In turn, we must offer them support and allow those residents who consider themselves British to be a part of the equation. What steps has the FCDO taken to ensure that the US is aware of the strength of opposition to this decision from those from the Chagos Islands?
Minister reply
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his serious question. This deal not only settles some of the outer islands for the Chagossian communities but allows visits to Diego Garcia for the Chagossian communities who were removed in a way that this Government so deeply regret. The detail of the deal is good to secure our national security and US national security, and it takes important steps to recognise and remedy the pain suffered by Chagossian communities.