DIEGO GARCIA INHABITANTS (Hansard, 14 October 1975)

§ Lord BROCKWAY
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

§ The PARLIAMENTARY UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE, FOREIGN and COMMONWEALTH OFFICE (Lord Goronwy-Roberts)
My Lords, according to Mauritian Government records, 1,151 people returned to Mauritius from the entire Chagos Archipelago between 1965 and 1973. Of these, 359 were transferred from Diego Garcia when the copra plantations were closed down in 1971. 773 The Mauritian Government have told us of their difficulties in devising a plan to resettle the islanders using the £650,000 which Her Majesty's Government have provided for the purpose. We welcome the Mauritian Prime Minister's recent suggestion that we should provide expert assistance in working out an acceptable scheme.

§ Lord BROCKWAY
My Lords, while thanking my noble friend for that Answer may I ask him two questions? First, why is it that there has been so much silence on this issue for many weeks, indeed for some months; and why is it that we have had to rely on Washington for the facts, not only about the number involved but about the actual commitments to Diego Garcia? Secondly, could my noble friend add to what he has said about the settlement of these people as to the provision which is being made for their retention in Mauritius, their return to the Islands or their transfer to the Seychelles?

§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTS
My Lords, on the first point I do not believe it is quite correct to say that there has been any deliberate silence about this matter. I have been looking at the Instruments which have been placed before Parliament since 1965 when the British Indian Ocean Territory was established, The story is there and a great deal of detail was given to Parliament, and therefore to the people. Of course, there has in recent weeks been a revival of interest in what has happened to the 359 Diego Garcians who were transferred back to Mauritius, because the Mauritian Government have found it difficult, if not impossible, to devise an acceptable scheme of resettlement for these people.
Naturally, as an independent country, it was for Mauritius to disburse the substantial amount of money which was made available to them and which they regarded in 1973, when it was made, as a full and final discharge of Britain's obligations in this respect. However, at their request, we have now welcomed a suggestion that we should send out British experts to the area to help formulate an acceptable scheme of long term resettlement. I cannot go into the details of the possible scheme that may come out of those discussions, but I am sure that my noble friend and the House 774 will be following the course of the discussions and, no doubt, at appropriate times in the future my noble friend will raise the matter again. I shall be delighted to discuss it.

§ Lord WIGG
My Lords, does the Minister not agree that, on the whole, Her Majesty's Government, both Labour and Conservative, behaved properly and generously in the arrangements made on paper? Also, is it not a fact that the Mauritian Government, having accepted something in the region of 1,300,000 dollars, put it into the coffers of Mauritius and left the majority of these 1,000-odd individuals from the Chagos Archipelago either to starve or to remain homeless; and that, while there is no legal, or perhaps, moral responsibility on Her Majesty's Government or their predecessors in the arrangements, we now have a direct concern in seeing that these people are treated not only generously, but properly—for these are not quite the same things? Further, would the Minister agree that he used a word in his reply which was of some significance? He said that these individuals would "return" to Mauritius. The word "return" means that their home was in Mauritius and that they went to the Chagos Archipelago. Does he not agree that many of them were born there, and would he give the House an assurance that if oil is subsequently discovered—and there are suggestions that there are considerable deposits of oil—those who lived in the Chagos Archipelago will be the beneficiaries of at least some of the great wealth that may accrue from that fact?

§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTS
My Lords, the use of the word "return" was, I believe, absolutely appropriate in the case of a great many of the people concerned, but I agree that others have been migrants among the Islands. It is very difficult to define precisely the nature of this population. It was very largely made up of contract labour which moved about from one island to another, and there are a great many islands in this part of the world, as noble Lords will know. So that if I say that the majority returned to Mauritius, I feel that that is a fair statement. However, I agree that many others were born on islands in the BIOT.
775 As to the point about oil or other natural resources which may be discovered in the area, we have informed the Mauritian Government that any benefits from such natural wealth, if discovered, will accrue to Mauritius and nobody else. I should make it clear that the possibility of investigating this will not arise until the need for the retention of this island and others in the Territory for defence purposes has ended. But the undertaking is firm: whatever wealth is discovered in this area will accrue to the benefit of Mauritius.
On the point about the generosity of Her Majesty's Government, I am delighted to agree with my noble friend. Her Majesty's Government have indeed been very generous, but, dealing with an independent country, they have not sought to follow up the provision of a large sum of money for this specific purpose, and, indeed, an even larger sum of money in compensation for loss of sovereignty, by intruding upon the arrangements which we understood the Mauritian Government were themselves making. However, they have now come to us and asked us to help them, not only by being generous, as my noble friend put it, but by helping them to be effective in using that generosity.

§ Lord HALE
My Lords, would my noble friend say whether it is true that these people were evacuated and obliged to depart from their homes virtually by force, that one party returning to Diego Garcia was accommodated in the local gaol for the night and put on a boat the next morning for Mauritius, where some of them had never lived, and that the deportees refused to leave the last boat arriving in Mauritius until they were obliged by force to leave—all this in the most over-populated area of the whole continent of Africa where there was absolutely no provision available for them? Lastly, is it now true that the population of Diego Garcia consist of 1,000 American troops and 30 to 60 British naval ratings?

§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTS
My Lords, what my noble friend has said does not accord precisely with the information which I have. It is, for instance, not true to say that more than a very few of the population of Diego Garcia were finally reluctant to leave, 776 and it is absolutely true to say that no physical force or anything like "evictionary" practices were used in the final stages of the transfer. Naturally, some were reluctant to leave, but the great majority left voluntarily and none was forced in the sense my noble friend means. As to the conditions which many of these people have found in Mauritius when they have gone there—some returning, others going there—it is undoubtedly true that a great many enjoy a lower standard of life than they did when they were living on Diego Garcia. However, of the 421 families who have been surveyed by the Mauritian Government, 243 heads of families were found to be in fairly consistent employment, which was not the position when they were working on the Islands in copra. Fifty-seven were in receipt of old age pensions from the Mauritian Government and 74 were in receipt of various forms of public assistance. The object of the expert advice which Her Majesty's Government will proffer to the Mauritian Government at their request will be to devise a scheme—and here I reply to a point raised by my noble friend Lord Wigg—which will effectively use the £650,000 made available by Her Majesty's Government to the Mauritian Government, the great bulk of which is still intact.

§ Lord WIGG
My Lords, would the Minister not also agree that in considering the matter he will inform the House of the details of the arrangements made with the American Government, by which rebates were given on the sale of Polaris and Polaris parts as a quid pro quo for financing this operation and coming to a political arrangement which enabled the Americans to have access to the island as part of their defence policy in the Indian Ocean?

§ Lord GORONWY-ROBERTS
My Lords, my noble friend is of course referring to the circumstances in which the British Indian Ocean Territory was set up. That cost a lot of money. It was anticipated that it would cost £10 million to establish it. The Americans offered on certain conditions to make a contribution —some half of the cost, but up to £5 million. This was met by an off-set arrangement, very much on the lines which my noble friend has described. There was nothing unusual or questionable about that. In the event, the 777 Americans and we have a limited naval communications facility in the Ocean; not in any way to be compared with what other Powers have already established for themselves on the littoral of that Ocean.

§ Lord CARRINGTON
My Lords, would not the noble Lord the Leader of the House agree that perhaps this is the kind of question that might be more appropriately put down as an Unstarred Question? We have been going now for 23 minutes.

§ Lord SHEPHERD
My Lords, I am glad that the noble Lord, Lord Carrington, has intervened. It is very difficult to know what to do when subjects which are very close to the hearts of Members of your Lordships' House are being put to the Minister. But I agree with the noble Lord that 23 minutes on three questions is too long. This is something we ought to take into account in the future, and I hope that as a response to what the noble Lord has said we might now proceed to the next Question and that we can deal with it briefly.

§ Lord MERRIVALE
My Lords, having just returned from that area, might I seek the leniency of your Lordships, bearing in mind that the noble Lord, Lord Wigg, has had three bites of the cherry? If there is any truth in the well documented article which appeared in the Sunday Times last month on this very question, would the noble Lord not agree that, in effect, the Diego Garcians are living in great squalor in Port Louis; and does the noble Lord not think it desirable that this question should be looked into very expeditiously? Would he also bear in mind that there is great concern in the area about the future living conditions of these people?

§ Lord SHEPHERD
My Lords, if the noble Lord will look at the responses of my noble friend, he will see that he has already dealt with the assurances for which he is asking. I hope that we can now proceed to the next Question.