Prime Minister Keir Starmer's government faced a bruising and humiliating series of defeats in the House of Lords last night over its contentious plan to transfer sovereignty of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius. Peers delivered multiple blows to the British Indian Ocean Territory Bill, demanding greater scrutiny, cost transparency, and safeguards for the Chagossian people and British taxpayers.
Parliamentary Ping-Pong Looms as Lords Impose Amendments
The upper chamber inflicted a string of setbacks on the legislation, which is required to implement a treaty signed in May to return the Indian Ocean archipelago to Mauritius. The changes set the stage for a protracted parliamentary 'ping-pong' battle, where the bill will be volleyed between the Commons and the Lords until an agreement is reached.
Central to the peers' revolt is the disputed total cost of the deal. The UK has agreed to establish a £40 million fund for displaced Chagossians and pay Mauritius at least £120 million annually for 99 years to lease back the strategic Diego Garcia military base—a cash commitment of at least £13 billion. The government estimates a lower annual cost of around £101 million, while critics, including former ministers, warn the bill could soar to £35 billion.
Key Demands: Cost, Oversight, and Chagossian Rights
Peers voted decisively, by 194 to 130, to force the government to publish the total cost of payments to Mauritius, including the full methodology. This amendment, led by Conservative peers, aims to end what opponents call a lack of transparency over the colossal financial commitment.
In a narrow vote of 131 to 127, the Lords also backed a Liberal Democrat measure to ensure parliamentary oversight of all UK government spending linked to the treaty. This would allow MPs to halt payments if Mauritius were judged to have breached the deal's terms.
In a significant earlier defeat, the Lords supported, by 210 votes to 132, a requirement for a referendum among the Chagossian community. This vote would determine if the transfer deal adequately guarantees their rights to resettlement, consultation, and participation, with the government compelled to respond to the result.
Military Base Safeguards and Geopolitical Fears
Reflecting deep concerns over the long-term security of the Diego Garcia base, peers voted 132 to 124 in favour of an amendment from former military chiefs. This measure, championed by former defence chief Lord Houghton of Richmond, would cease payments if the base became unusable for reasons ranging from environmental changes and legal restrictions to an attack by a hostile state.
Lord Houghton warned the treaty must 'cater far better for what the future might hold,' citing recent unpredictable geopolitical events. Conservative shadow foreign minister Lord Callanan argued it was 'unconscionable' for British taxpayers to fund Mauritius if the base became inoperable.
Responding for the government, Foreign Minister Baroness Chapman of Darlington insisted the treaty included mechanisms to deal with such developments and was covered by international law.
Political Fallout and Next Steps
Conservative shadow foreign secretary Dame Priti Patel branded the episode a 'humiliating defeat' on Labour's 'shameful anti-British Chagos Surrender Bill,' accusing the government of dodging scrutiny over territory and taxpayers' money.
The bill, having passed the Commons, now returns there for MPs to consider the Lords' amendments. The government must decide whether to accept the changes or seek to overturn them, guaranteeing further contentious votes and highlighting the profound political and constitutional sensitivities surrounding the Chagos Islands transfer.
