Live Debate: Lords Chamber

Urgent Question Repeat: Implications for national security and the management of terrorist offenders following disruption to the Separation Centre regime

The government is. Carefully considering the findings of Jonathan Hall cases independent review into the operation of.

15:38

Lord Keen of Elie (Conservative)

- -

Separation centres, which was commissioned following the dreadful attack. At HMP Frankland in April this year. And we will publish Mr. Hall's report. Our response in due course. But also, I would add, in imminently when it comes to the regimes in our separation centres, members of your Lordships' House will be pleased to know that I've been to to see the centre at HMP Frankland and meet a number of the staff who are, I have to say, incredibly brave and professional public servants, and we are doing a number of operational improvements

**** Possible New Speaker ****

to improve their safety as well. My Lords. The. Finding by the High Court.

15:39

Lord Timpson, The Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (Labour)

- -

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The. Finding by the High Court. That any prisoner in England, whoever they may be, has been subjected to inhumane.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

subjected to inhumane. Or degrading. Treatment shames us all. My Lords, we all understand the need

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Lords, we all understand the need for separation centres for high. Risk terrorist offenders. But can. The noble Lords say what steps

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The noble Lords say what steps the government will now be taking in the light of the Abu judgement, to ensure that prisoners in to ensure that prisoners in separation centres are not so cut off from human contact as to endanger their mental health, and that all such prisoners have access to adequate, high quality psychiatric care as Abu did not.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The the separation centres protect the public from the most protect the public from the most serious offenders and the a small number of prisoners held in these centres, and the regime is the

15:39

Lord Marks of Henley-on-Thames (Liberal Democrat)

- -

centres, and the regime is the purpose of activity. Limited association and rehabilitation, and the noble Lord will know that that word rehabilitation is something that is really important to me and also what is what is very clear from having met the staff who work in separation centres is that they're not all classically trained prison officers. A number are psychiatrists, psychologists, experts in security and so on. And it's very much a team effort of what they do to make sure we run good regimes.

That has a real focus on rehabilitation. And also, if I could just add that I'm really looking forward to getting into more of the detail on Jonathan more of the detail on Jonathan Hall's report and also when it's published with the recommendations, because it's going to be very helpful to us as we look to the helpful to us as we look to the future about how we run these very system.

15:40

Lord Timpson, The Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (Labour)

- -

Does my noble friend agree with me that there is no inconsistency with having adequate separation in the context of of terrorism offenders and complying with our most basic and fundamental human rights obligations? And in the light of noble Lord Lord Marks question and crucially, the decision of Mr. Justice Sheldon last week, all we need to do, and I know my noble friend is is an expert in these matters, is to ensure that appropriate mental health provision is made for any offender, particularly those who are isolated for long periods in

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the day. I thank my noble friend. We're carefully considering the High carefully considering the High Court ruling on the Abu case, including considering appealing the decision, and our decisions are decision, and our decisions are based on risk and proportionality of our response. Of that risk is how we make our decisions and how we make our decisions and someone's mental health in throughout the whole justice system is something that is a very

15:41

Baroness Chakrabarti (Labour)

- -

is something that is a very important factor in how we manage everyone's risk, from whether they're on a first night or a first time in prison, to whether they have been in in the system for a very long time. And I am proud of so many of my colleagues who spend so much of their time in our prisons and also our probation staff too, who really go out of their way to support people with their mental health requirements. But also what is clear is the support that we give our NHS and health providers in our prisons is really important too.

We need to enable that. They have the right space and time to work with people who are often very vulnerable.

15:42

Lord Timpson, The Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (Labour)

- -

My Lords, there is a gaslighting quality about the High Court judgement that the public sector equality duty was breached because no consideration had been given to decisions which meant a cohort of prisoners, all Muslim, were treated in a particular way. This could, the judge said, have been perceived as a form of collective punishment against Muslims. My Lords, all inmates in the separation centre are Muslims. 75% of MI5's counterterrorist caseload are Islamist extremists and 63% of prisoners for terrorism related offences are Muslims.

When I visited HMP Frankland in 2022, a prison officer in the separation unit told me that they were perpetually, and I thought, dangerously constrained by the PTSD and human rights legislation. Will the government appeal this judgement and strenuously reassure prison governors that they can and must continue to use separation units to keep officers, prisoners units to keep officers, prisoners and the public safe? Yeah. and the public safe? Yeah.

15:43

Lord Farmer (Conservative)

- -

The. As I as I said to my noble friend, we're considering appealing the decision. And also what is important is that the staff who work in in our separation centres have the skills that they need to care for the people who are in that separation centre. But I also go back to the Jonathan Hall work that we commissioned him to do. And, you know, the the system is robust, but we always need to look for improvements. And that is why we've asked Mr.

Hall to look at all of our separation centres and the policies that we have to make sure

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that it is right for the future. My Lords. Does my noble. Friend

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My Lords. Does my noble. Friend the. Minister agree with me? Sorry, does my noble friend, the Minister think that we are doing enough to

15:44

Lord Timpson, The Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (Labour)

- -

think that we are doing enough to keep our staff safe in our prisons, with increasingly violent prisoners

**** Possible New Speaker ****

challenging authority? What else is being done? My noble friend is right to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My noble friend is right to raise this question. One of the things that surprises me going around prisons now, compared to 25 around prisons now, compared to 25 years ago, is how much more violence there is on our wings, and violence there is on our wings, and that is probably a combination of the amount of drugs in our prisons and the number of people with severe mental health issues, but severe mental health issues, but also people serving very long sentences. But one of the things sentences.

But one of the things that we are doing is investing in protecting our staff, because, as my noble friend said, our staff do my noble friend said, our staff do an amazing job, often in very difficult and dangerous situations. So that's why we've invested £15 So that's why we've invested £15 million in 10,000 personal body armour, jackets and suits. And also

15:45

Baroness Ramsey of Wall Heath (Labour)

- -

armour, jackets and suits. And also we're getting 500 staff trained in how to use tasers. And every other week I speak to prison leaders. And last week I was talking to the governors of the long term high secure estate. And they were telling me how much, how much reassurance the staff have had from the fact that they're now getting protection.

15:45

Lord Timpson, The Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (Labour)

- -

Could I ask, could I ask the noble Lord, the Minister, whether or not the prison service has sufficient resources for the mental health issues they have to deal with?

**** Possible New Speaker ****

I'm not an expert in healthcare, but I'm an expert in prisons. And but I'm an expert in prisons. And what I see is prisoners getting incredible levels of support. But often in regimes that are that are running hot. So I my personal assessment is, is that prisoners assessment is, is that prisoners are getting very good care. But but within a system that is struggling. And so what we need to do is to And so what we need to do is to make sure we have a much more stable prison environment.

And that is why running prisons, when you literally have no space left is very, very difficult to to run everything, to get people out of everything, to get people out of their cells and to get the support that that people need. But I also think it's important to have the right facilities and some of the new prisons I've seen that we've built. The medical facilities are excellent and appropriate because we're dealing with people who are often very, very ill. Their life,

15:46

Baroness Butler-Sloss (Crossbench)

- -

the life expectancy of someone in a prison is much lower on average, than someone who hasn't been to

**** Possible New Speaker ****

prison. So we need to do all we can to support people with their mental health, but also their other health issues as well. My Lords, my.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My Lords, my. about. Increasing violence. In prisons. Is that as true in.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Is that as true in. Women's prisons. As it is. In men's prisons?

15:47

Lord Timpson, The Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (Labour)

- -

**** Possible New Speaker ****

In men's prisons? I don't know the exact facts. And I will write to the noble Baroness on the exact details on Baroness on the exact details on violence in women's prisons. But what I can tell you, there are two facts that I think are very, very worrying. The rate of self-harm in a women's prison compared to a men's prison is eight times higher, and 60% of women in prison have brain damage as a result of being hit. So we're dealing with some people with severe illnesses, and

**** Possible New Speaker ****

that is what we need to do to support them. My Lords, I'll give. A minute for people to.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Leave the chamber. If they want to before next

15:47

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean (Labour)

- -

15:48

Lord Timpson, The Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (Labour)

- -

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Base in British Indian Ocean Darlington.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Darlington. I beg the House to again resolve itself into a committee upon the bill.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

bill. The question is that the House do now again resolve itself into a committee on the bill. As many as committee on the bill. As many as that opinion will say, content and the contrary, not contents.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

The contents have it. In clause one, amendment 17.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

In clause one, amendment 17. Lord Callaghan. My Lords, I rise to propose the

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My Lords, I rise to propose the amendments in my name on this group. The trust fund set up for the Chagossians is absolutely central to this treaty. Under article 11, the Mauritians have been given the the Mauritians have been given the responsibility for administering the fund, which will be paid for,

15:49

Legislation: Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill - committee stage (day 2) - part one

the fund, which will be paid for, of course, by the UK, but we still do not have any clarity on how Mauritius will manage the fund, and we seem to have no say in it whatsoever. The reality of Mauritius past record is, of course, also a cause for concern, since the forced removal of the Chagossians from the archipelago, many Chagossians have lived on Mauritius and in the 1970s, as has been pointed out a number of times in the debate so far, the UK government paid £4 million into a

15:51

Lord Callanan (Conservative)

- -

trust fund for the benefit of registered Chagossians, so I'd be very interested to know the government's assessment of whether that trust fund has indeed been a that trust fund has indeed been a success. Does the government, in fact, have any concerns about the way Mauritius has managed that fund way Mauritius has managed that fund before we offer to donate cash for another one. If the government is another one. If the government is concerned about Mauritius's past actions in this area, what additional assurances have additional assurances have Ministers sought from the Mauritian government to prevent mismanagement, corruption or failure to properly corruption or failure to properly distribute funds in future? The domestic reality, of course, of this arrangement is also worrying.

this arrangement is also worrying. Many Britons will struggle to understand why we are transferring funds to a foreign government so that they can manage a trust fund on our behalf. Does this mean we are transferring funds without proper control over how those proper control over how those monies are spent? What powers will the UK have under the treaty to the UK have under the treaty to ensure that Mauritius is in fact fulfilling its responsibilities? These are all important questions. Many members have raised it in the debate so far that I believe Ministers should seek to answer Ministers should seek to answer either at the despatch box or on the face of the bill.

Turning to amendment 17, in my name and amendments 26 and 28, in the names of my noble friends Lord Lilley and Lord Hannan of Kingsclere, these relate to the employment of Chagossian citizens on the military base. The treaty makes provision for the employment of Mauritians on the base, and we debated issues related to that provision in an earlier group. The treaty sadly does not make any provision for the employment of Chagossians on the base. We already know how many Chagossians living on Mauritius feel as though they are treated like second class citizens.

Does the Minister agree that Chagossian should have similar protections for their employment on the military base? As Mauritians? Amendment 81, in the name of Lord Morrow, is also a very simple amendment that would provide for a report on the impact of the Treaty on British Indian Ocean Territory citizens, and I see no reason why Ministers would refuse to produce that report. The rights of our citizens are indeed, or should be central to the future of the islands, and we do need some necessary clarity on this matter.

If the government cannot commit to a report on the impact of the treaty, will the Minister at least give the House an assurance that her department will do everything in its power under the terms of the treaty, to ensure that our citizens are properly supported by Mauritius? I look forward to hearing the rest

**** Possible New Speaker ****

end. Amendment proposed clause one,

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Amendment proposed clause one, page one, line seven at end in certain words is printed on the Marshall List.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

Marshall List. Lord Saatchi. In this group I want to move amendments 20, 50 and want to move amendments 20, 50 and 81 A before I speak to my amendments. I want to also strongly support the amendment 55 in the name of my noble friend Lord Weir of Ballyholme. As a noble Lady of Ballyholme. As a noble Lady knows, I have asked several questions about the trust fund, which, as I understand it, will be totally in the control of the Mauritian government.

And as the noble Lady the Minister knows, I believe that that brings inherent problems, particularly as those Chagossians living here in the UK are often near or below the poverty line, and could well do with access to help and assistance. And to help and assistance. And amendment 55 seeks to probe the fairness of the payments to Mauritians and Chagossians. And I Mauritians and Chagossians. And I would go further and say that the Secretary of State should establish a Chagossian Advisory Council, comprised primarily of individuals of Chagossian descent, including members based here in the UK,

15:53

Baroness Foster of Aghadrumsee (Non-affiliated)

- -

members based here in the UK, Mauritius and Seychelles, and this council could then be consulted on all strategic program and spending decisions relating to the Trust Fund, ensuring that Chagossian communities are directly involved in shaping priorities and oversight that would promote transparency and the minutes of the Council meetings, and any recommendations or advice could also be published annually. Now, I know that that goes further, that the amendment than the amendment in the name of Lord Weir, but I'd be obliged to hear from the noble Lady on this issue, as it would deal with some of the issues around transparency and accountability as well.

On amendment 28, I'm not going to labour the points raised in this as we discussed some of this last week in committee, apart from to remind the House that the current provisions of the treaty do not grant a right for Chagossians to assess their homeland, but rather leaves it up to the Mauritian government as to whether this happens or not. To quote article six, the Mauritian government is free to implement a program of resettlement, and that falls far short of right to access the islands.

And that is what this amendment seeks to do. My Lords, moving on then, to amendment 58, which concerns the protection of Chagossian identity and birthplace. I put this amendment down at the request of the Chagossian community here in the UK, including many native islanders who were born on Diego Garcia and Salomon before their forced removal between 1968 and 1973. My Lords, this amendment is not theoretical and it's not precautionary. It actually responds to a real current, and I have to say, deeply troubling practice that is already happening.

And I think the House needs to be aware of the seriousness of this. We have now seen documentary evidence that Mauritian authorities have begun issuing birth certificates to Chagossians, in which the true place of birth has been removed and replaced with Mauritius. In each case, the names of islands such as Diego Garcia, Paris Banos or Solomon have been deleted from the official record. That's not an allegation, it's a matter of record. Chagossian families have shown us the documents and they've been verified by lawyers.

Native islanders born on Spanish and Diego Garcia are now being told by a government claiming future sovereignty over their homeland that they weren't born there at all. This pattern of altering official records is consistent with long standing concerns expressed by Chagossians, who lived in Mauritius, many of whom describe decades of discrimination, marginalisation and a complete lack of constitutional recognition as a distinct people. United Nations human rights experts have previously documented that Chagossians and Mauritius faced entrenched barriers to housing, to healthcare, to employment, and to political participation, and continue to experience de facto discrimination as an Afro descendant minority.

Indeed, I wonder, would the noble Lady, the Minister, care to look at the website of the Mauritian government, which is dedicated to the Chagos Archipelago? And there they refer to those who were forcibly removed from the islands in the 1960s as Mauritians, born and residing at the time in the Chagos Archipelago. Now, I've personally seen a passport of a chagossian who was deported from Diego Garcia to the Seychelles and in that case the birthplace originally recorded as Diego Garcia has been replaced with Mauritius.

I'm also informed by those directly affected that this practice followed political agreements involving the former Mauritian Prime Minister and the former Seychelles president, under which Chagossians living in Seychelles were required to have Mauritius entered on their documents, rather than the true place of their birth on the island. Now, whether these arrangements were informal or formal, the effect is the same. The birth place of Chagossian natives has been erased, replaced or falsified, and my Lord Goddard is an act of identity deletion.

And it's happening now, and the evidence is in front of us. I think the way to deal with this is this amendment. I believe it is essential that Chagossians were removed once their homes were demolished, their pets were killed, their possessions were thrown into the sea, and they were shipped to Mauritius and the Seychelles with no warning and no rights. And they lost their land, their livelihood and their future. What they ask for today, I believe, is very modest in comparison.

They ask for the one thing they still possess, and that is the truth of who they are and where they were born. And I have to say, I think this house really needs to take cognisance of that, because identity is not a technicality for a displaced person. It's absolutely everything. And it's the final surviving link to their home, to their lineage, to history and to dignity. Yet we now know not fair, not speculate, but know that the birthplace of Chagossian natives has been altered by an external authority, and there can be no more powerful demonstration of why this House must intervene.

And the government has repeatedly argued that decisions about the Chagos should respect international norms. And we've heard it many times in this House. An international law is absolutely clear on this point. Altering a displaced persons civil status records without their consent violates the principles laid down in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the UN Guiding Principles on International Internal Displacement, and the Fundamental Norms to Identity as recognised in Human Rights Jurisprudence. So, my Lords, this cannot go unchecked, and the amendment requires three simple, just and necessary things.

First of all, that the Secretary of State must intervene through diplomatic and international channels to ensure that the birthplace of Chagossian natives continues to be recognised accurately. Second of all, that all official documents, birth records, passports and identity papers must reflect the truth of a person's origins. And third, that Parliament must be informed annually of any attempts by any state to alter or erase this information. My Lords, Chagossians are one of the most dispossessed people in the modern British story.

They were removed without their consent. They were misrepresented in official papers. They were denied self-determination, and their history has often been told without them. And now, now even their birthplace is being overwritten. And we cannot we cannot allow that to happen. And I hope, my Lords, that this amendment 58 will gain support. Finally. Then, amendment 88 calls for a report within three months of this bill becoming law on the impact of the transfer of sovereignty, particularly on the preservation and the right to access sites of Chagossian heritage.

I think it's a very minimalist requirement. It's the very least we can do. And I would ask the noble Lady, the Minister, to give a sympathetic ear and due consideration to this

**** Possible New Speaker ****

amendment and indeed all of the other amendments I have spoken to. My Lord.

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My Lord. My Lord, I just rise to speak very briefly in support of my noble friend Baroness Foster. Based on friend Baroness Foster. Based on insight and experience, there was the Chagossian package that we the Chagossian package that we negotiated. We being the previous government, it was a £40 million package over ten years, and part of the challenge that was faced by the previous government was on its previous government was on its administration and governance as to who would have a say on how those monies were spent.

Some of the delivery partners, for example, included the British Council for packages on English language training, and we also worked with universities, including Middlesex, in this respect on delivering again skill sets for Chagossian communities. There was also some communities. There was also some insight provided by local government governance on governance

16:02

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Conservative)

- -

by local communities right here in the United Kingdom. But I share that insight and experience because it remained a big challenge as to how it would be administered. So in summing up, perhaps I could also ask the Minister specifically the 40 million Chagossian support package was administered as the noble Lady. The Minister will know by the FCDO, i.e. the UK government, in this £40 million which is now being proposed, it will shift. So the issue of accountability, and particularly for the Chagossian people, will be a vital component.

Secondly, I would also just ask the probing question as to the existing schemes which are already operational for memory and I'm going purely from memory. There was about 30 odd million which had been allocated. Will those schemes run to the end of their project period? And what's happened to that extra 10 million? Has it been reallocated to the 40 million which is now being proposed on the trust fund by

**** Possible New Speaker ****

the government? My Lords, I rise to move

**** Possible New Speaker ****

My Lords, I rise to move amendment 38 and 38 be in my name and that of Lord Weir the amendment and that of Lord Weir the amendment for the House in my name, that this government should seek to ensure limited commercial and chartered limited commercial and chartered flights for British citizens to and from Diego Garcia, using the existing runway facilities is one of great importance. Like many colleagues have already mentioned colleagues have already mentioned that the very heart of this conversation ought to be the islanders themselves.

And my Lords, I was privileged to receive correspondence from many members of correspondence from many members of the community living in the United Kingdom, asking that they would Kingdom, asking that they would reflect their concerns on this issue. My Lords, I believe this is issue. My Lords, I believe this is a very modest but vital step towards addressing the historic injustice inflicted on the Chagos community and shall explain why the government should accept this government should accept this amendment and why the bill in its present form is not adequate.

present form is not adequate. Without it, noble Lords will be aware of the history of the British Indian Ocean Territory, and I do not intend to repeat it today. However, we must be continually mindful of what happened to the heavens of these islands in 1968 and 1973, then numbering around 2000, they were removed from their homes so that they could, they could see, could become the site for UK US military base. Since then, the government has repeatedly recognised that these are British Overseas Territory citizens, some native but many new descendants of deceased islanders who never returned and the government has provided certain support measures throughout the years or so they might contend.

Yes, in spite of this, my Lords, the failed to take into account the undeniable important right of the Chagossians to have any meaningful access to their former homeland. They have been denied what we consider an expectation to return home. At the end of the day, this amendment is about more than symbolic flights. It addresses infrastructure, reconnection and justice. It taps into the people on their campaign for representation. Throughout this long process, for Her Majesty's Government has continually left them very much outside in the cold.

This amendment would allow limited commercial or chartered traffic, especially for the science community in the United Kingdom. This is not a wholesale opening of the island, nor does it challenge the base operations. It simply permits members of the community, many of whom live in the United Kingdom, to visit, to reconnect and maintain their culture and family

Feed Live - Click to view video

Return to start of debate - Return to top of page