Please email your Labour MP to table a motion of objection before the Thursday deadline.
If 49 Labour MPs had the courage to rebel over welfare, they can — and should — object to sending over £100 million a year to Mauritius for nearly a century. But time is running out. They must act before the end of tomorrow (Thursday) to table a motion to pause the treaty.
Tell your MP: the public is watching — and that money is urgently needed here at home, not 6,000 miles away.
The UK Government is on the brink of committing to over £100 million per year in payments to Mauritius under the proposed Chagos sovereignty treaty.
But Labour MPs have a chance to stop it. With the deadline for parliamentary objection fast approaching (by the end of Thursday, 3 July 2025) Labour MPs must act swiftly to suspend the process and give them time to consider the deal and the outcome of the latest judicial review, or explain why they are prioritising foreign lease payments over fixing the domestic welfare shortfall.
£100 Million a Year vs. UK Welfare Crisis
In recent weeks, the Labour government has faced a storm of criticism over its welfare reform proposals. Amid mounting public pressure, Labour ministers were forced to scale back key elements of the policy, leaving a £4.5–£4.8 billion hole in their fiscal plans over the next five years.
And yet, under the new Chagos treaty, the government is preparing to sign away:
- Over £100 million per year to Mauritius for 99 years (£165 million per year for the first 3 years)
- Totaling close to £30 billion, plus additional inflation-linked payments, and
- A further £1.125 billion in development aid and Chagossian funding.
All this, for the UK to lease back the strategically vital island of Diego Garcia, part of the Chagos Archipelago, which it already controls and which currently costs the UK virtually nothing to maintain. All major operational expenses are covered by the United States, which operates a major military base on the island.
A Treaty Labour Can — and Should — Stop
Under the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act (CRaG), Parliament still has the power to object to the treaty before the end of play tomorrow (Thursday), forcing a pause or full suspension. Labour MPs, now in government, have a duty to exercise this authority — or accept responsibility for the fiscal and political consequences.
Where Are the “Welfare Rebels” Now?
During the vote yesterday on the welfare bill, 49 Labour MPs rebelled against their own government — citing concerns over disability payments, child poverty, and fairness.
These Labour MPs were: Diane Abbott, Rosena Allin-Khan, Paula Barker, Lee Barron, Lorraine Beavers, Olivia Blake, Richard Burgon, Ian Byrne, Irene Campbell, Lizzi Collinge, Stella Creasy, Marsha De Cordova, Peter Dowd, Neil Duncan-Jordan, Cat Eccles, Clive Efford, Mary Kelly Foy, Tracy Gilbert, Mary Glindon, Chris Hinchliff, Imran Hussain, Terry Jermy, Kim Johnson, Ian Lavery, Brian Leishman, Emma Lewell, Clive Lewis. Rebecca Long-Bailey, Rachael Maskell, Andy McDonald, Navendu Mishra, Abtisam Mohamed, Grahame Morris, Margaret Mullane, Simon Opher, Kate Osamor, Kate Osborne, Richard Quigley. Bell Ribeiro-Addy, Marie Rimmer, Cat Smith, Euan Stainbank, Graham Stringer, Marie Tidball, Jon Trickett, Derek Twigg, Chris Webb, Nadia Whittome, Steve Witherden
But those same MPs have yet to raise their voices about the £100 million annual outflow to Mauritius — a figure that could plug major gaps in social spending, fund thousands of nurses, teachers, or carers, or reduce pressure on local councils.
If these MPs could stand up to Labour on welfare, why not now, on an equally consequential issue?
Opportunity Cost vs. National Need
£100 million a year equals:
- 2,000 nurses on average NHS salary,
- 2,500 teachers,
- or ~20,000 Universal Credit recipients receiving £5,000 each annually.
Over a decade, that sum could transform public services — yet it’s earmarked for lease payments to a foreign government.
Fiscal Reality
The UK does not currently pay rent or fees to maintain Diego Garcia. The U.S. military pays all operational costs, which experts estimate at $150–$300 million annually. The UK pays only minimal civil administrative expenses.
By contrast, the treaty would introduce a brand-new, taxpayer-funded liability on a scale comparable to entire departmental budgets.
What Labour Must Do
As the governing party, Labour holds both the power and the responsibility to:
- Table a motion of objection before the Thursday deadline.
- Suspend the treaty until the outcome of the ongoing judicial review.
- Reassess the treaty’s costs in light of welfare funding needs.
Bottom Line
The Labour government is asking the country to tighten its belt at home, while preparing to send £100 million a year abroad for territory Britain already holds.
This isn’t decolonisation — it’s duplication of cost.
It’s not strategic — it’s fiscal leakage.
And it’s not necessary — it’s avoidable.
Labour MPs must act before the end of tomorrow (Thursday). If they can rebel over welfare, they can object to this. The public is watching — and the money is needed here, not 6,000 miles away.
WRITE TO YOUR LABOUR MP TODAY:
Sample letter:
Dear MP,
I am writing to urge you to act by tabling or supporting a motion to suspend the Chagos sovereignty treaty process before the parliamentary objection window closes at the end of tomorrow (Thursday, 3 July 2025).
Under the proposed deal, the UK Government is preparing to commit £100 million per year to Mauritius in lease payments for territory we already control — Diego Garcia — and which currently costs the UK almost nothing, as all base operations are funded by the United States.
This comes at a time when the Government has had to scale back its welfare plans due to public pressure, leaving a £4.5–£4.8 billion fiscal gap over the next five years. That same sum — nearly £30 billion over the full term of this proposed agreement — could help fix the very social and economic challenges you raised during the welfare debate.
Why This Matters Now
- Parliament still has the power under the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act (CRaG) to object to the treaty before Thursday’s deadline.
- Suspending the ratification process would allow Parliament the time to: Fully assess the treaty’s long-term costs and Review the implications of the ongoing judicial review.
What’s at Stake
The treaty as proposed includes:
- Over £100 million per year to Mauritius (£165 million per year for the first 3 years)
- Close to £30 billion total, before inflation is accounted for,
- An additional £1.125 billion in development aid and Chagossian funding.
All this, to “lease back” a territory the UK already controls and pays almost nothing for (the US currently foots the bill as they have their military base there).
Meanwhile, that same £100 million a year could instead fund:
- 2,000 NHS nurses,
- 2,500 teachers, or
- 20,000 Universal Credit claimants receiving £5,000 each.
This isn’t about foreign policy alone… it’s about priorities. With departmental budgets under strain and the welfare system under intense scrutiny, this level of spending abroad, for something the UK already possesses, deserves robust debate, not quiet ratification.
I urge you to:
- Support or table a motion of objection before the deadline,
- Call for the process to be paused, pending judicial review,
- And demand a full reassessment of whether this expenditure is compatible with the public’s priorities.
At a time when the Government is asking families to tighten their belts, sending £100 million a year overseas for a redundant lease is not just questionable — it’s indefensible.
Thank you for considering this urgent request in the national interest.
With respect,
This government would give there own mother away