Chagos deal cost is ‘going rate for best defensive real estate', says ex-FO boss
The independent crossbencher, a former ambassador who headed the Foreign Office from 2015 to 2020, spoke in support of the agreement in the face of strong objections at Westminster, with opponents branding it a 'surrender' and 'gross folly' funded by the public.
The deal signed last month after long-running negotiations, started under the previous Tory administration, returns sovereignty of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, but will see Britain lease back the strategically important military base on Diego Garcia.
It follows a 2019 advisory opinion by the International Court of Justice, which said the UK should cede control.
As well as establishing a £40 million fund for Chagossians expelled from the islands, the UK has agreed to pay Mauritius at least £120 million annually during the duration of the 99-year agreement, a total cost in cash terms of at least £13 billion.
The Government, however, estimates the bill will be lower at around £101 million a year, while critics argue it will be much higher.
The deal could also be extended in the future for an extra 40 years, provided agreement is reached.
In a recent report, the House of Lords International Agreements Committee (HLIAC) said although 'not perfect', the treaty must be ratified to avoid legal challenges that could threaten UK control of the military base.
Its members warned Mauritius was 'likely' to resume its campaign to secure a binding judgment on sovereignty against Britain unless the agreement was approved and concluded the Government 'cannot ignore' the risk of an 'adverse ruling' putting Britain's right to run the joint UK-US site in jeopardy.
Speaking at Westminster as peers debated the controversial accord, Lord McDonald said: 'The most damaging blow to any country's international reputation is a justified charge of hypocrisy.
'The United Kingdom stands for the rule of law in all circumstances. We lose credibility when we seek exceptions to this principle for ourselves.'
He added: 'Opponents dislike the expense of the deal.
'Well, we're paying the going rate as a tenant for a base in the wider Indian Ocean, somewhat more than the French in Djibouti, but we're getting more for more.
'Diego Garcia is the best defensive real estate in the whole Indian Ocean.
'Even though £101 million per year is a lot, it's a lot less than the Americans pay to run the base.
'It's a joint base, and we're paying our way in the joint effort.'
Lord McDonald also disputed the agreement would bolster China's presence in the Indian Ocean, arguing that 'our partner in Delhi looms much larger in Mauritian calculations than our challenger in Beijing'.
He went on: 'Confronted by a charge of double standards, some opponents of this agreement shrug their shoulders. They think they can get away with it, tough it out. But that is what the powerful and unprincipled do. That is what Russia does.'
The peer added: 'It gives the UK and our American allies a secure presence in the archipelago for the next 140 years.
'It enhances our security and restores our reputation as a country respecting international law, even when inconvenient and costly.'
But Tory shadow foreign minister Lord Callanan said: 'This agreement amounts to a retreat, a surrender of sovereign territory that serves as a linchpin of our defence architecture at a time when authoritarian threats are rising and alliances matter more than ever.
'Handing control to a government who align themselves ever more closely with Beijing – a regime that actively undermines international norms and our national interests – is not only unwise, it is positively dangerous.
'To compound the error, the British taxpayer is being made to foot the bill.'
He added: 'This whole affair has been a gross folly. There is no strategic gain here, no credible guarantee for the future of Diego Garcia and no reassurance for our allies.
'Instead, we send a message to adversaries and allies alike that British sovereignty is indeed negotiable. It is capitulation and we must reject it.'
Pointing out the Tories in office had opened negotiations to cede sovereignty, Liberal Democrat Lord Purvis of Tweed said: 'The treaty is a consequence of now completing the previous Conservative government's policy.'
Foreign minister Lord Collins of Highbury said the agreement secured the future of the military base and had the support of key allies.
He told the chamber: 'This deal will protect the safety and security of the British people for generations, making sure that the United Kingdom retains the unique, important capabilities we need to deal with a range of threats in the months and years ahead.'
Peers rejected by 205 votes to 185, majority 20, a Tory attempt to get the House to oppose the treaty's ratification, which would have forced the Government to make a statement on why the deal should still be approved.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
32 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Palestine Action spraying paint is not terrorism. As ministers abuse their powers, I feel a duty to speak out
Strongly worded emails are not doing it. Appeals to MPs are not doing it. Taking to the streets in our hundreds of thousands with banners and placards is not working. Elected representatives from every party in parliament have stood in the Commons and asked the government to act. Some government ministers themselves have condemned Israel's starvation of Palestinians in Gaza. Every poll of public opinion shows that the nation demands we stop arming Israel, and wants to see an immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire. But none of these things are working. Keir Starmer and his cabinet remain impervious to all calls for humanitarian intervention, and Israel is still killing children in Gaza with the support of the British government. To proscribe as 'terrorist' a non-violent direct action group such as Palestine Action threatens the fundamental rights of freedom of expression, and of peaceful protest. Surely the government should only ever apply the Terrorism Act with the utmost restraint and precision. Otherwise it allows the state to repress civil liberties that have been dearly fought for and won, and which represent the bedrock of our democracy. Those civil liberties have already come under real and dangerous threat. The powers given to the police have incrementally increased to an alarming degree, owing in part to the Terrorism Act of 2000 and the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act of 2022. These have both led to the right of public protest being seriously eroded, and afforded the police much greater powers and significantly less accountability. We have for some time seen these powers being used to suppress lawful protest and to detain peaceful protesters. In addition, leaving aside its members, the proscription of Palestine Action will directly affect many other activists who are deeply concerned about the massacre of Palestinians in Gaza. Even to be seen to support PA's non-violent direct action will be to risk being criminalised. The government's response to embarrassing security breaches at RAF bases by Palestine Action seems disproportionate, and highlights, I think, the influence on them of vested interests. There has long been a campaign by senior rightwing politicians, arms company executives and pro-Israel lobby groups to shut down Palestine Action and have it proscribed. Lockheed Martin UK is a key manufacturer of parts for the F-35 fighter jets that have helped Israel flatten the Gaza Strip, kill more than 56,000 people and create more child amputees per capita than anywhere else in the world. The government ended direct sales to Israel of some weapons, but created an 'F-35 exemption' allowing sales of these parts to continue to reach Israel via the US, where the planes are assembled. The Israeli arms manufacturer Elbit Systems also operates on UK soil, and our government has lucrative bilateral deals with the company. As far back as 2022 the then home secretary, Priti Patel, held a meeting with Martin Fausset, the CEO of Elbit Systems in the UK, to discuss how to deal with Palestine Action. The definition of terrorism as laid out in the Terrorism Act of 2000 is clear, and includes 'serious damage to property'. Does spraying red paint on to metal constitute serious damage? The condemnation of this spraying of red paint on to planes as expressed by the home secretary, Yvette Cooper, does not appear to be matched by any equivalent condemnation by her of red blood sprayed on to the tented walls of Gaza. So yes, crimes concerning damage to property have been committed, but there are already laws in place to deal with them. Labelling these as terrorism only serves to deepen the UK government's complicity in the war crimes being committed in Palestine. In a further act of desperation, efforts have been made to try to undermine the motives of Palestine Action by making a tenuous link to Iran, with unnamed Home Office sources telling newspapers it is investigating the group's finances. Smear campaigns such as this are part of a wider policy by government to intimidate and clamp down on dissent. I have had a small taste of this myself. On 18 January, I attended a rally in Whitehall organised by Stop the War – and noticed immediately that the tactics of the police that day seemed to be markedly different. Present in their thousands, they were already kettling people at the start of the event, and behaving in a manner that seemed aggressive and provocative. The march to the BBC, which had been planned to protest against its coverage of the conflict, had been prohibited by the Met at short notice, and the gathering was confined to Whitehall. I was asked to join a group of about 12 people who would form a symbolic delegation, and request passage through police lines to reach the BBC. There we planned to lay flowers at the door. Reaching the police lines, after some hesitation and resistance, an officer allowed us through. Shortly after that, however, our progress was curtailed by another police line. It was here that I saw at close hand the disproportionate tactics used by police. I witnessed further vanloads of police arriving in the area, kettling peaceful protesters and making numerous arrests – 77 in total that day. Three weeks later I was sent a letter from the Met threatening me with charges under section 14 of the Public Order Act. I then faced a three-hour police interview, before being told after several weeks (and several thousand pounds of legal fees) that I would face no further action. Over the past 21 months, I have met many hundreds of people who come out – often travelling long distances – to protest against this genocide. Old people and young, people of every faith, race, generation and ethnic identity. They come in horror at the brutality being inflicted on the population of Gaza. And many of those in our midst are Jewish. But still we are accused by lobby groups of antisemitism. This I disregard; I am married to a Jewish man, whose mother was a refugee from Hitler's Vienna. She escaped just in time in 1938 as a refugee, and most of her family were subsequently wiped out in the Holocaust. My children define themselves as Jewish, and we have many beloved Jewish friends, all of whom are appalled by the activities of Benjamin Netanyahu, his government and the Israel Defense Forces. These Jewish friends are people driven by compassion, humanity and a sense of right and wrong that will not yield to intimidation. In Gaza, the world is watching the most heinous acts of violence that I have witnessed in my lifetime. It is as if the skin has been ripped off the face of humanity to reveal terrifying depths of sadism and depravity. I am intensely aware of this thought: I do not want to find myself at the end of my life looking back at this time regretting that I could have done something and didn't – that I was too frightened to speak out, or to act. Palestine Action and its supporters will have no such regrets. Our current British government, however, may well. Juliet Stevenson is an award-winning actor Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
The Independent
37 minutes ago
- The Independent
Two arrests after Palestine Action claims blocking Israeli defence firm UK site
Two arrests have been made after soon-to-be banned direct action group Palestine Action claimed to have blockaded the entrance of an Israeli defence company's UK headquarters. It comes ahead of proposed legislation that will ban the group under anti-terror law. Avon and Somerset Police said a 30-year-old woman and a 36-year-old man, both from London, have been arrested on suspicion of criminal damage, unauthorised entry to a prohibited place and locking onto a person, object or land to cause serious disruption. Earlier on Tuesday, a Palestine Action spokesperson said activists had blocked the entrance to Elbit Systems in Bristol, and covered it in red paint 'to symbolise Palestinian bloodshed'. Avon and Somerset Police said officers were called to the site at around 6.30am. A spokeswoman said: 'Two people have been arrested following a small protest outside a premises at the Aztec West Business Park, in Almondsbury. 'They remain in police custody and inquiries are ongoing. 'We're committed to facilitating people's right to peaceful protest, but will not tolerate any criminal behaviour.' The incident comes as a draft order was laid before Parliament on Monday to amend the Terrorism Act 2000 to include Palestine Action as a proscribed organisation. If approved, it would become a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison to be a member of the direct action group or to support it. MPs and peers are expected to debate the legislation on Wednesday and Thursday and, if approved, the ban could come into force by Friday. A Palestine Action spokesperson said: 'While the Government is rushing through Parliament absurd legislation to proscribe Palestine Action, the real terrorism is being committed in Gaza. 'Palestine Action affirms that direct action is necessary in the face of Israel's ongoing crimes against humanity of genocide, apartheid, and occupation, and to end British facilitation of those crimes.' The group also occupied the rooftop of UK subcontractor Guardtech Group, the spokesperson added. Officers are also at the scene at the site in Brandon, Suffolk. A Suffolk Police spokesman said: 'Officers and specialist negotiators are currently at the location and our immediate priority is to bring this to a conclusion and to ensure the safety of everyone at the scene.' Palestine Action is seeking a legal challenge against the Government's bid to proscribe it, with a hearing expected on Friday to decide whether the ban can be temporarily blocked, pending further proceedings to decide whether a legal challenge can be brought. Commenting on the proscription on Monday, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said: 'The right to protest and the right to free speech are the cornerstone of our democracy and there are countless campaign groups that freely exercise those rights. 'Violence and serious criminal damage has no place in legitimate protests.'
Glasgow Times
39 minutes ago
- Glasgow Times
Starmer abandons key welfare reforms in face of Labour revolt
The Government has shelved plans to restrict eligibility for the personal independence payment (Pip) and any changes will now only come after a review of the benefit. The climbdown came just 90 minutes before MPs were due to vote for the first time on the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill. Labour rebel ringleader Rachael Maskell said the situation was 'a complete farce' (Richard Townshend/UK Parliament/PA) It will cause a major headache for Chancellor Rachel Reeves as the welfare squeeze was originally meant to save £4.8 billion a year, which was subsequently reduced to £2.3 billion when the Bill was first watered down last week. Postponing any changes to the eligibility criteria for Pip means it is now uncertain how much the reforms will save from the soaring welfare bill. Tory leader Kemi Badenoch accused ministers of 'utter capitulation' and said the legislation was now 'pointless'. She said: 'They should bin it, do their homework, and come back with something serious. Starmer cannot govern.' Some 39 Labour MPs have signed an amendment which would see the Bill fall at its first hurdle in the Commons. Rebel ringleader Rachael Maskell said: 'The whole Bill is now unravelling and is a complete farce. 'What it won't do is stop the suffering of disabled people which is why we are determined to go ahead with the reasoned amendment and attempt to vote down the Bill at second reading.' A previous effort to kill the Bill had attracted more than 120 Labour supporters, but was dropped after the first partial U-turn on the legislation last week, which restricted the Pip changes to new claimants from November 2026. Tory leader Kemi Badenoch said the legislation was now 'pointless' (Stefan Rousseau/PA) That date has now been abandoned in the latest climbdown, with any changes now only coming after disability minister Sir Stephen Timms' review of the Pip assessment process. Sir Stephen announced the climbdown in the middle of the debate on the legislation. He acknowledged 'concerns that the changes to Pip are coming ahead of the conclusions of the review of the assessment that I will be leading'. He said the Government would now 'only make changes to Pip eligibility activities and descriptors following that review', which is due to conclude in the autumn of 2026. The concession came after frantic behind-the-scenes negotiations in Westminster involving the Prime Minister, his cabinet and wavering Labour MPs. It appeared to have won round some Labour doubters. Josh Fenton-Glynn, who was one of the 126 Labour MPs who signed the original rebel amendment to the welfare reform Bill last week, described the move as 'really good news'. He said he wanted to support the Government at 'every opportunity' and was glad changes to personal independence payment eligibility would be delayed until after the Timms review. But other Labour MPs appeared exasperated, with one telling the PA news agency that no-one 'knew what they were voting on anymore'. Charlotte Gill, head of campaigns and public affairs at the MS Society, said: 'We thought last week's so-called concessions were last minute. But these panicked 11th hour changes still don't fix a rushed, poorly thought-out bill.' But Jon Sparkes, chief executive of learning disability charity Mencap, said: 'The last-minute change relating to the review Sir Stephen Timms is leading sounds positive and we are pleased that the Government has listened.' He added: 'Disabled people should not have to pay to fix black holes in the public finances.'
