Shastri-Hurst cites sovereignty, cost, and security
Dr Neil Shastri-Hurst, MP for Solihull West & Shirley, has voted against the government’s agreement to transfer sovereignty of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, warning the deal is “legally unsound, strategically dangerous, and financially reckless.”
The Conservative MP, a former British Army officer and barrister, has been one of the most outspoken critics of the arrangement. He previously branded the deal “a pre-emptive capitulation” and said it relied on “speculation rather than binding international law.”
Legal and strategic concerns
During parliamentary debates, Dr Shastri-Hurst argued that conceding sovereignty without clear international legal rulings undermines the UK’s position globally. “International law demands rigour, not conjecture,” he said, adding that the move could embolden future challenges to British sovereignty elsewhere.
He also stressed the strategic importance of the Chagos Archipelago, home to the joint UK-US defence facility on Diego Garcia. In his view, the government’s agreement sacrifices long-term security interests “for political expediency.”
Financial warning
Alongside sovereignty and security concerns, the Solihull MP highlighted the rising financial cost of the transfer. He claimed the deal could now reach £35 billion, “ten times the figure first claimed,” and warned the funds would come at the expense of the defence budget at a time of global instability.
Final vote and reaction
After voting against the deal last night, Dr Shastri-Hurst said: “I voted against the Chagos sovereignty transfer because I believe it represents a dangerous erosion of our legal foundations, national security interests, and financial prudence. The strategic importance of this region cannot be overstated, and we must not compromise it for an agreement lacking legal robustness.”
He added that the decision risked undermining Britain’s global credibility while diverting “billions of pounds, previously earmarked for defence, towards paying for territory we’re abandoning.”
The government has argued that the agreement with Mauritius fulfils international obligations and paves the way for improved diplomatic relations in the Indian Ocean region.
But for Dr Shastri-Hurst, the vote was clear-cut: “Such a decision undermines both our security and our fiscal responsibility.”
