Sir Keir Starmer's government faced a 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 transparency on the deal's multi-billion-pound cost and enhanced protections for the displaced Chagossian community.
Parliamentary 'Ping-Pong' Looms as Lords Force Changes
The upper chamber inflicted a string of setbacks on the legislation, which is required to implement a treaty signed in May. The treaty would see the UK cede control of the remote Indian Ocean archipelago to Mauritius while leasing back the strategically vital military base on Diego Garcia for 99 years. The Lords' amendments now set the stage for a parliamentary 'ping-pong' tussle, with the bill set to return to the Commons for MPs to consider the changes.
The Government's agreement, initiated under the previous Conservative administration following a 2019 International Court of Justice opinion, includes establishing a £40 million fund for exiled Chagossians. Crucially, the UK has also agreed to pay Mauritius at least £120 million annually throughout the 99-year lease, amounting to a staggering cash cost of at least £13 billion. However, the total bill is hotly disputed, with the Government estimating it at around £101 million per year and critics warning it could soar as high as £35 billion.
Key Defeats: Cost Transparency and Base Contingencies
Peers voted decisively, by 194 to 130, to force the Government to publish the total cost of payments to Mauritius, including the full methodology behind the calculations. In a narrow vote of 131 to 127, they also backed a Liberal Democrat amendment to ensure parliamentary oversight of UK spending linked to the treaty, allowing MPs to halt payments if Mauritius breaches the terms.
In a significant move concerning the Diego Garcia base, peers voted 132 to 124 in favour of a measure proposed by former military chiefs. This would cease payments if the base becomes unusable for reasons ranging from environmental changes and legal restrictions to an attack by a hostile state. Former Chief of the Defence Staff Lord Houghton of Richmond warned the treaty must 'cater far better for what the future might hold,' citing recent geopolitical unpredictability.
Chagossian Rights and Political Fallout
The Lords also supported, by 210 votes to 132, a Liberal Democrat change requiring a referendum among the Chagossian community on whether the deal adequately guarantees their rights to resettlement and consultation. The Government would be compelled to respond to the result.
Responding to the defeats, Conservative shadow foreign secretary Dame Priti Patel labelled it a 'humiliating defeat' on a 'shameful anti-British Chagos Surrender Bill.' She accused the Government of seeking to 'silence and ignore the Chagossian people and dodge scrutiny.' Foreign Minister Baroness Chapman defended the treaty, stating it included mechanisms to deal with developments relating to the base and was covered by international law.
The bill will now return to the House of Commons, where MPs must decide whether to accept or reject the Lords' substantial amendments, guaranteeing further political confrontation over this sensitive and costly foreign policy decision.
