House of Commons · Urgent Question
02 July 2025 · 17 other contributors
Opened by Priti Patel Con Witham
Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.
Priti Patel raised concerns about british indian ocean territory sovereignty 2025-07-02 in the House of Commons. A government minister responded. Other MPs also contributed.
Key points
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said.
Opened the debate
Will the Minister confirm the ratification process for the UK-Mauritius treaty on the future sovereignty of the British Indian Ocean Territory and address concerns about parliamentary scrutiny, financial implications, and impact on Chagossians?
Question
Why cannot we have a debate and vote in this House on the treaty, despite Labour's actions against scrutiny? What are Ministers afraid of regarding MPs' concerns over financial implications?
Minister reply
The deal has had proper scrutiny through parliamentary questions, urgent questions, committee reports, and debates. There will be a vote when primary legislation is introduced to ratify the treaty.
Question
Does the Minister agree that support from US Government, Five Eyes allies, NATO, and India underpins the deal's importance for national security?
Minister reply
Absolutely right. This deal secures our capabilities and was signed off with full inter-agency support in the US and backing from key allies.
Question
Does the Minister agree that proper consultation with Chagossians is essential, given their history of being denied self-determination? Will he reverse the decision not to bring the treaty for scrutiny in this House?
Minister reply
Chagossian interests have been at the heart of discussions. We will continue commitments on resettlement and trust fund as outlined. The treaty has received thorough scrutiny including parliamentary questions and committee reports.
Question
Will the Minister explain in detail why he believed that he had no choice, including what body, at what time, and with what jurisdiction?
Minister reply
I refer the right hon. Member to the detailed evidence I gave in the House of Lords on this matter the other day, including on the legal circumstances. The previous Government recognised the risk to the operation of the base in the medium and short term and started the process.
Question
Can the Minister confirm that this deal will end a dangerous, irregular migration route into the UK?
Minister reply
This Government took early action to ensure that the route was closed down by the memorandum of understanding we reached with St Helena.
Question
Can the Minister tell the House why he thinks China supports this deal?
Minister reply
The United States, our Five Eyes partners and India support this deal. Mauritius was one of the few countries not to join the belt and road initiative.
Question
Will my hon. Friend remind them that on their watch, our armed forces were hollowed out?
Minister reply
Whether it is in the ambitious agenda for national security and defence set out in the strategic defence review, this Government are leading from the front when it comes to national security.
Question
What contribution is the United States making to the very significant costs of compensating the Mauritian people?
Minister reply
The United States makes significant and crucial contributions to the operations from Diego Garcia. The benefit to the United Kingdom, the United States and our allies is priceless.
Question
What notification has to be given to the Mauritius Government for the base to be used for operational purposes?
Minister reply
We do not have to provide notification in advance. The treaty refers to ‘expeditiously’ informing after the event, and that is absolutely the normal course of business.
Question
Surely the way to ensure proper scrutiny of this deal is to have a proper debate?
Minister reply
There is full support for this deal from our allies in the United States and the Five Eyes partners. The rationale for this deal is that our national security was at risk.
Question
How does the Minister think my constituents feel when they see the Mauritian Government crowing about virtually abolishing income tax in Mauritius?
Minister reply
The previous Government started this process and why we have concluded it. The costs under the deal are broadly comparable with what France pays for its base in Djibouti.
Question
Will the Minister set out what the need was for immediacy?
Minister reply
We have had days in court on this issue. The fact is, it is our view that a legally binding judgment would inevitably follow.
Question
Since the Government are in the mood for U-turns, why do they not take the hint and U-turn on this terrible Chagos deal?
Minister reply
I will not take any lessons from a party that fawns over Vladimir Putin.
Question
Will the Minister confirm that in the arrangements now being made, the Chagos islanders have a right of return? What is his attitude towards their rights to visit and reside on Diego Garcia?
Minister reply
The primary purpose was to secure the base on Diego Garcia for UK and allies. We have expressed deep regret for how Chagossians were removed in 1960s-70s; that is set out in the treaty. Visits, including to Diego Garcia, will restart. Mauritius determines resettlement outside Diego Garcia. Further statements will be provided on this matter.
Question
Why was there not full and adequate consultation with the Chagossian people?
Minister reply
I will not comment on ongoing judicial matters, but as I have set out before, negotiations were necessarily between UK and Mauritius. However, we recognise the importance of islands to Chagossians; hence measures for visits and resettlement have been put in place.
Question
Is it correct that the US is contributing to the £30 billion lease under the settlement?
Minister reply
Further to that point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. Perhaps due to noise and shouting, I was clear: The United States contributes to the operations on Diego Garcia, as rightly so. There is establishment of this in relation to exchange of notes between UK and US. It does not contribute towards the costs of the treaty deal.
Government Response
I thank the right hon. Lady for her question. On 22 May, the Diego Garcia treaty was signed and laid before the House. This treaty secures the UK-US military base on Diego Garcia, which is essential to national security. The treaty includes robust security measures preventing threats from outer islands, ensuring operational control well into the next century. It will be ratified once domestic processes are complete, including parliamentary scrutiny under CRAG and primary legislation in both Houses. A ministerial statement will provide updates on Chagossian resettlement and the trust fund. This agreement secures a critical military asset for UK and its allies.