Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

UK-Mauritius Agreement on the Chagos Archipelago: Funding

Tuesday 28 October 2025 · 3 questions

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

Read the full transcript on Parliament.uk

At a glance

Answered 0 Partly answered 2 Not answered 0

Key points

  • UK funding due to Mauritius as part of the Chagos archipelago agreement will be split between the Foreign Office and the Ministry of Defence.
  • The exact proportion of payments between the Foreign Office and the Ministry of Defence will be published in the annual accounts of each Department.
  • The cost of the agreement in today's money is 101 million, with a net present value over 99 years of 3.4 billion.

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 Jack Rankin Con Windsor
Foreign Affairs
Context

The agreement concerning the Chagos archipelago involves significant funding for Mauritius, but specifics about the Departmental budget allocation are unclear.

Question

How much and what proportion of the funding due to be allocated to Mauritius as part of the agreement concerning the Chagos archipelago will come from my Department’s budget?

Answer from Stephen Doughty (Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)

We have secured a deal that will protect the operation of the UK-US base on Diego Garcia well into the next century. The payments made under the deal will be split between the Foreign Office and the Ministry of Defence, and published in the annual accounts of each Department.

Partly answered

Not addressed: The proportion of funding from the Foreign Office's budget was not specified.

How: Will Be Published

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q2 Jack Rankin Con Windsor
Foreign Affairs
Context

The agreement concerning the Chagos archipelago involves significant funding for Mauritius, but specifics about the Departmental budget allocation are unclear.

Question

In what proportion will the payments made under the deal be split between the Foreign Office and the Ministry of Defence?

Answer from Stephen Doughty (Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)

As I have said, that will be published in the annual accounts of each Department.

Partly answered

Not addressed: The proportion was not specified; only stated it would be published later.

How: Will Be Published

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q3 Andrew Rosindell Reform Romford
Taxation Foreign Affairs
Context

Labour voted against an amendment to give the House of Commons a say on the Government’s decision regarding £35 billion of taxpayers' money for Mauritius in exchange for keeping Diego Garcia operational. There is uncertainty about the future of the base after 99 years.

Question

Last week, Labour voted against our amendment, which would have given the House of Commons a say on the Government’s reckless decision to surrender £35 billion of taxpayers’ hard-earned money to Mauritius for the privilege of giving away our own sovereign territory. What is stopping Mauritius demanding billions more if the UK wishes to extend the use of Diego Garcia for another 40 years? Would it not be more sensible to save the money, ditch the surrender deal and the keep the Chagos islands British?

Answer from Chris Elmore

As the hon. Gentleman knows from the many questions that I have answered on this issue, and indeed the debate we had in this place that secured the Bill’s Third Reading, the cost of the agreement in today’s money is £101 million, and the net present value over 99 years is £3.4 billion. However much he comes up with other fantasy figures, they are simply incorrect; these are verified by the Government Actuary’s Department. If he wants to talk about spending and value, I will not apologise for spending on our national security and keeping this country and our allies safe. For comparison, he might like to reflect on the fact that the annual payment is 20% less than the cost of the festival of Brexit.

Not addressed: The hon. Gentleman's concern about future demands from Mauritius was not directly addressed; instead, a comparison with 'the festival of Brexit' was made to justify current spending.

How: Fantasy Figures, Comparison

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)