Question
Mr Speaker, I hope you will indulge me as I say a very quick thank you to the Clerk of the House, who is in his place and who was my Clerk on the Foreign Affairs Committee. He is probably more to blame for me standing here today than many other people in the House. May I ask the Foreign Secretary whether he now accepts the Bill in the name of Lord Weir that has passed in the Lords?
Answer
Let me add my congratulations and thanks to the Clerk of the House. On the Chagos islands, which the right hon. Gentleman is referring to, we have always sought to find a way forward that protects our base at Diego Garcia; that is the most important thing, and I would have thought that aim was shared by Members from across the House. As has become clear, under this US Administration, we will not get consent for the current arrangements, but we continue to work with the US and Mauritius to safeguard our security interests.17% point-scoring
Verdict: RED (22/100)
The question asked whether the Government accepts the specific Lord Weir Bill that passed the Lords. The reply never mentions the Bill or Lord Weir and gives no clear yes or no on it. It instead suggests the Government will not proceed with the current Chagos arrangements and is working with the US and Mauritius, which is only an indirect and hedged response. A member of the public would likely need to ask again for a direct position on the Bill.
How we got there
| Question item | Coverage | Specificity | Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Foreign Secretary now accepts the Bill in the name of Lord Weir that has passed in the House of Lords. | Partially Addressed | Hedged | The question asks whether the Government accepts the specific Lord Weir Bill that passed the Lords. The reply never mentions the Bill or Lord Weir. It implies the Government will not proceed with the current Chagos arrangements ("we will not get consent for the current arrangements") and that it is working with the US and Mauritius, but it never states a yes or no on the Bill itself. |