British Indian Ocean Territory: Sovereignty

Lord Callanan Excerpts

Thursday 3rd July 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Callanan (Con)]

My Lords, watching this UQ in the other place yesterday was a slightly surreal experience. The Lib Dem spokesman said it was a shambolic process—he was obviously correct, although he clearly had not consulted his colleagues in this Chamber, who had voted for it 24 hours earlier. Government is about choices, particularly when there are limited resources, although it seems that Labour Back-Benchers have not realised this yet. The Government must allocate those limited resources to their most pressing priorities. We know that this £30 billion Chagos giveaway is being partly funded from the noble Baroness’s overseas development budget, although she has so far refused on a number of occasions to tell us exactly how much of it. How did she come to the view that funding tax cuts for Mauritians was a greater priority than funding other ODA programmes which provide, for example, life-saving vaccinations to children?

[The Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (Baroness Chapman of Darlington) (Lab)]

I see that we are back to the charming noble Lord, Lord Callanan, whom we used to know and love. The cost of this will be around £100 million a year. That is about the cost of running the NHS for five hours or the Queen Elizabeth vessel—I hesitate to say which type, so I will not try. This is excellent value. It secures our ability to share this base with the United States and it is fundamental to our security in this country. It enables us to fight terrorism and keep ourselves safe. This is nothing to do with the ODA budget, as the noble Lord well knows. I will leave the spokesman for the Liberal Democrats to deal with whatever feud they have going on about process.

--- Later in debate ---

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

I mean, there is plenty. They were removed more than 50 years ago, and we can discuss the wrong of that. It was done, as Members will no doubt observe, under a Labour Government. That is all true. That does not change where we are today. Under successive Governments, including Conservative-led ones, it was recognised that negotiations were necessary to secure the legal footing of the base. I know that the ruling was advisory, but it was soon to be followed by a binding ruling. We could choose to disregard that binding ruling. Other nations would be unlikely to choose to disregard it.

[Lord Callanan (Con)]

There is no binding ruling.

[Baroness Chapman of Darlington (Lab)]

I just said that there is no binding ruling but we anticipate that there would be one, which is presumably why the previous Government were negotiating. The decision we have taken secures the base. It gives a sound legal footing. It means that our allies and friends, whom we rely on to make that base work and supply it with all the things necessary to run it well, can now proceed on a secure legal footing. It has been welcomed by our allies across the world, including the United States.