A Bill to give effect to, and make provision in connection with, an agreement between the governments of the United Kingdom and the Republic of Mauritius concerning the Chagos Archipelago.
House of Commons
Mr David LammyLabour (Co-op)
30 April 2026
May contain errors — check source documents for definitive information.
The bill puts a 2025 UK–Mauritius agreement about the Chagos Archipelago into law and makes related changes to BIOT governance and nationality rules. It has prompted extensive Lords amendments focused on safeguards for Chagossians, sovereignty matters, environmental protections, and parliamentary oversight, which the Commons has largely resisted; the bill is now being considered in the Lords to resolve those differences.
The bill began in the Commons and moved to the Lords, where a large package of amendments was proposed. The Commons subsequently disagreed with several Lords amendments, and the bill is currently in the Lords to resolve those differences and determine the final form.
In late January 2026, the Commons voted to disagree with Lords Amendments 1, 5 and 6, reflecting government and many MPs’ preference to keep the treaty terms closer to the Commons’ original plan. Across parties, there was a mix of support and opposition to different amendments, with Labour and many Conservatives backing the government line, while Liberal Democrats and some smaller groups tended to oppose some of the Lords’ safeguards.
Generated 21 February 2026
15 Jul 2025
9 Sept 2025
9 Sept 2025
20 Oct 2025
20 Oct 2025
21 Oct 2025
4 Nov 2025
18 Nov 2025, 25 Nov 2025
5 Jan 2026
12 Jan 2026
20 Jan 2026
20 Jan 2026
Showing agreed, defeated, and withdrawn amendments.
Based on 10 recorded votes • Sorted by % Aye
The 2024-26 session of Parliament has prorogued and this bill will make no further progress.
The Lords amendments to the Diego Garcia Bill propose several new clauses: (i) an 'inoperability' provision requiring publication of UK–US correspondence if the base is unusable and a government assessment before certain provisions take effect; (ii) rights for Chagossians established via an exchange of letters with Mauritius, with ministerial reporting on protections; (iii) negotiations with Mauritius on Chagossian resettlement and self-determination, including a funded referendum and progress reports; and (iv) a mechanism to cease treaty payments if Mauritius fails to honour treaty obligations after the joint dispute process is exhausted.
This Lords Amendment Paper records Lords Amendment 5 to be inserted after Clause 5 of the Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill. It states that Lord Callanan will move, as an amendment to the Minister’s motion on consideration of Commons reasons, to replace the motion with one that insists on Amendment 5 by changing the wording from 'House' to end to 'do insist on its Amendment 5'.
This Lords amendment paper lists motions for the Lords to decide whether to insist on their amendments to the Diego Garcia Military Base and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill, in light of the Commons’ reasons for disagreeing. It records Lords Amendments 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 and the corresponding motions to not insist, each tied to the Commons’ Reasons 1A, 2A, 3A, 5A and 6A. The document is procedural, outlining how the Lords may respond to the Commons’ objections rather than proposing new policy changes.
The Lords proposed amendments to the Diego Garcia Bill to delay some provisions until a treaty amendment is sought, to hold a second referendum of the Chagossian community on resettlement and participation rights, and to require cost disclosures and parliamentary oversight of treaty-related spending. The Commons rejected these amendments, saying they would reopen treaty terms, create charges on public funds, and duplicate information and expenditure controls.