Gibraltar

Debate between Lord Kerr of Kinlochard and Baroness Chapman of Darlington

Tuesday 17th June 2025 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

I thank the noble Lord for his work in the past regarding Gibraltar, which I did not know about. We will absolutely make sure that Fabian is made aware of the warmest of words that have been said in this Chamber and the other place about the tireless work that he has undertaken on behalf of the people of Gibraltar, over very many years, to make sure that their interests are reflected in the agreement that we have now made.

I will not get into the whole relitigating of Brexit; I think we are all a bit exhausted with all that. As the noble Lord says, there is now a reset of the EU relationship, which shows what can be achieved with patience and pragmatism and when there is a focus on the people rather than, perhaps, some of our ideological hobby-horses. That is the approach that this Government have taken to this issue and will take to all issues regarding our relationship with the EU. It is important that we restore our relationships, that we co-operate on things such as security, that we get our SPS agreement sorted out and that we can work together on the challenges we face, such as illegal migration, climate change and the challenges to our economies. These are all things that we need to address together in that spirit of openness and pragmatism. That is far more profitable for the people of this country as well.

[Lord Kerr of Kinlochard (CB)]

I agree with the noble Baroness. In fact, I agree with everything she has said, with one exception: she implied that negotiations started under Dominic Raab as Foreign Secretary. I took part in three negotiations over Gibraltar Airport, the first of which was for Foreign Secretary Geoffrey Howe, so the stone in the shoe has been there for a very long time. I think it has been rather elegantly removed. The solution looks to be a very good one.

I know that the duty of an Opposition is to oppose—or so it is said—but I thought the Opposition Front Bench spoke slightly ungraciously about the deal. The officials who worked very hard for them on the early stages of this negotiation, particularly Vijay Rangarajan, have not been thanked in the same way that the Foreign Secretary—in my view quite correctly—thanked the officials who had completed the task that Vijay and his colleagues were doing when the Opposition Front Bench spokesman here tonight was their boss.

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

I bow to the noble Lord’s experience and knowledge. Clearly, this has been going on for very many years; he is right to remind us of that. He is also right to say that there are teams of officials who work on this and other similar matters with expertise and diligence. I have seen officials coming back from one round of talks on something and then having to go out again the following week, spending time away from their families. It is their job; they are paid to do it, and they do not complain. But it is right to underscore our appreciation when things like this are achieved.

G7

Debate between Lord Kerr of Kinlochard and Baroness Chapman of Darlington

Thursday 20th March 2025 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

I am not aware of any such discussions. I believe that the G7 has been focused on, as the noble Lord said, the vital issues that it faces.

[Lord Kerr of Kinlochard (CB)]

The Statement said that the G7 was

“united behind an inclusive political transition in Syria”.

I am not quite sure how we can help to bring that about until we again have an embassy in Syria. I apologise for coming around like a cracked record on this. The last time we spoke about it, Ministers seemed to be showing a bit of leg; there was a hint of movement. Is there any chance of that leg moving into action?

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

I do not need to explain to the noble Lord that it is not straightforward to reopen the embassy in Damascus after such a period of time, but I take on board his desire to see that happen. I understand why he said that; there are very good reasons to take that view. I will consider that alongside Minister Hamish Falconer, who I am sure will respect, as he should, the views of the noble Lord.

British Indian Ocean Territory: Sovereignty

Debate between Lord Kerr of Kinlochard and Baroness Chapman of Darlington

Thursday 19th December 2024 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

No, we will not be granting one. Bluntly, there is no point in stringing people along on these issues; that just compounds the wrong that has been done to them. The Chagos Islands have never been self-governing and the view among the Chagossian populations varies quite considerably. While there is a view among Chagossians here, we should be humble enough to accept that the largest Chagossian community is not in the UK but in Mauritius. That Chagossian community has been clear that it supports the deal, I suspect largely because of the point made my noble friend Lady Blackstone: that they would have that right to settle on the outer islands. The situation is not quite as straightforward as it is sometimes suggested.

[Lord Kerr of Kinlochard (CB)]

Does the Minister agree that the House would do well to note how warmly our friends and allies in the Pentagon, the State Department and the NSC have welcomed the extended and improved security of tenure of the base?

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

The security of and continuation of legal certainty regarding the base on Diego Garcia has been our prime objective in these negotiations. We would not have entered into any kind of agreement or deal that did not have the support of our closest allies, because if something might be acceptable to us but is unacceptable to them, the stability and security that we were trying to achieve would have been compromised, so the noble Lord is completely right.

British Indian Ocean Territory: Negotiations

Debate between Lord Kerr of Kinlochard and Baroness Chapman of Darlington

Wednesday 9th October 2024 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

One of the reasons that it took so long to get this deal over the line was because of concerns such as that, and wanting to make sure that the 99 years are fixed and firm, and it is never up for question in the way that the noble Lord describes. He is quite right to raise those concerns.

[Lord Kerr of Kinlochard (CB)]

On the security question and the Chinese issue, does the Minister agree that the United States Administration are in quite a good place to assess the security of the base in Diego Garcia? Will she again confirm that they have warmly welcomed the agreement? I was always less diplomatic than the noble Lord, Lord Jay. Would the Minister like to confirm that it takes chutzpah verging on hypocrisy for the Opposition Front Bench, populated by the luminaries of the last Government, to criticise an agreement negotiated with the support and under the supervision of the last two Conservative Foreign Secretaries and approved by the last Conservative Foreign Secretary? For them to criticise it now seems to me to be—well, I will settle for chutzpah.

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

I have said my piece on what I think of the way the Opposition has been handling this. It is true that President Biden, Secretary Blinken and Secretary Austin have all welcomed this agreement in terms that they really did not need to use if they were not so concerned to see the security of the base at Diego Garcia. I am glad that we have managed to secure the base; it is important for regional, and indeed global, security. I will leave others to reach their own conclusions about the way that the Conservative Party is approaching this.