Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

Chagos Islands: Marine Protection

Tuesday 20 January 2026 · 2 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 1 Not answered 0

Key points

  • Blake Stephenson questioned the Minister about a Yale University report ranking Mauritius poorly for marine protection and biodiversity.
  • The Minister responded that Mauritius announced the creation of the Chagos archipelago marine protected area on 3 November, prohibiting commercial fishing.
  • Priti Patel inquired about the Prime Minister's claim that Five Eyes partners supported the Chagos surrender Bill, citing concerns about China and Russia's influence.
  • The Minister countered Priti Patel's claims, asserting that the UK will not compromise its national security and that the agreement is vital for protecting it.

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 Blake Stephenson Con Mid Bedfordshire
Environment
Context

A Yale University report ranked Mauritius last out of 131 states for stringency in relation to its marine protected areas and 173th out of 180 for the protection of biodiversity. Mauritius has admitted it does not have the capacity to patrol the area, and commercial fishing is open.

Question

I thank the Minister for his response. A recent Yale University report ranked Mauritius last out of 131 states for stringency in relation to its marine protected areas, and a woeful 173th out of 180 for the protection of biodiversity. Mauritius has even admitted that it does not have the capacity to patrol the area, and that it is open to commercial fishing. I recognise the response that the Minister gave, but Britain has kept the Chagos marine environment pristine for 50 years. Why do the Government not want to secure that legacy in law?

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

With the greatest of respect, because I know that the hon. Gentleman raises the issue with sincerity, I was just very clear. It was on 3 November that Mauritius announced the creation of the Chagos archipelago marine protected area, and it has confirmed that no commercial fishing will be allowed in any part of the MPA. We are working very closely with Mauritius on patrolling and protecting the environment. These are important issues, and I assure him that we are absolutely seized of them.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Specific ask about securing legacy protection in law was not addressed directly

How: Reminded Of Current Mpa Announcement, Assured Of Ongoing Work With Mauritius

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

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

Q2 Priti Patel Con Witham
Foreign Affairs
Context

Labour’s Chagos surrender Bill is expected to cost £35 billion, compromise national security and betray the rights of the Chagossian community. The American President has publicly opposed it.

Question

The Prime Minister said that Five Eyes partners, including the United States, backed the Chagos surrender Bill, but today the American President has publicly opposed it, rightly citing the very concerns that we Conservative Members have raised about the malign influence of China and Russia, and their benefiting directly from the surrender of the Chagos islands. Is President Trump right? Given that Labour’s Chagos surrender Bill will cost £35 billion, compromise our national security and betray the rights of the Chagossian community, when will the Government finally see sense and scrap this shameful treaty?

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

Again, the right hon. Lady has made wild claims about costs. What she says is simply not the case. We have been absolutely clear that the UK will never compromise our national security. As we have made clear repeatedly, the agreement that we have struck is vital to protecting our national security and that of our allies, and to guaranteeing the long-term future of a base that is crucial for the UK and the United States. Our deal secures the operation of the joint US-UK base on Diego Garcia for generations.

Not addressed: Specific ask about scrapping the treaty was not addressed directly

How: Assertion That Claims Are Wild, Repeated Statements On National Security

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

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