Much Chagos discussion. Rumoured costs £9 billion/£18 billion thrown around. I sense many people don't realise these are 99 year aggregate estimates Whether/not a good/bad idea in principle, whether £90 million/year or £180 million/year are good/bad value, how it would work all reasonable Qs - ThreadSky

sundersays.bsky.social • 18 days ago

Much Chagos discussion.

Rumoured costs £9 billion/£18 billion thrown around. I sense many people don't realise these are 99 year aggregate estimates

Whether/not a good/bad idea in principle, whether £90 million/year or £180 million/year are good/bad value, how it would work all reasonable Qs

Comments

petemarchetto.bsky.social•18 days ago

It seems this is one of those things the right-wing press has shouted about long enough and loud enough for more mainstream outlets to think there may actually be a story here.

barryjames.bsky.social•18 days ago

As the US has a base don't they contribute?

sundersays.bsky.social•18 days ago

Any front-loading is also a relevant and reasonable question about the potential cost by 2020, as is any US contribution, and many other factors, once people have the basic point of the type of scale of £ under discussion being closer to 1% of what they think

sundersays.bsky.social•18 days ago

Obviously, people who object to the deal in principle can do so legitimately on that basis. (Butthen there is no need to multiply the costs by a factor of up to one hundred to object in principle to spending £1 or £1 million or £90 million on such a deal)

ianhunter.bsky.social•18 days ago

The front-loading of lease payments for a 99-year lease over an island that is projected to be underwater in half that time (due to global warming) shows that there is an overlap between (1) the folly of the deal as a whole and (2) the financial terms.

sundersays.bsky.social•18 days ago

I do not yet know many (any) of the details, because the government has not released anything, but has said the media reports from the PM there are inaccurate. What you say may be an accurate critique if and when there are any details

ianhunter.bsky.social•18 days ago

I think what you say shows why it is difficult to divide the “opposition in principle” from the “opposition to terms”. We are being asked to pay ££ to hand something back to people who don’t really want it and never really owned it. It is not difficult to infer that their motive is partly financial.

ianhunter.bsky.social•18 days ago

The Chagossians don’t want to live there. The Mauritians don’t want to live there (and never have lived there). This is all a financial and political play by the Mauritian government.

columnist.bsky.social•18 days ago

Yeah plus they’re simple additions vs PVs.

modsocdem.bsky.social•18 days ago

Depends on how much is front loaded.

sundersays.bsky.social•18 days ago

tibbsmum.bsky.social•18 days ago

Even 9 billion on Chagos will be resisted by many Brits. Billions were spent in Iraq and Afghan conflicts and for what? Peace? A better life for those living there? Many Brits would say " just stop using airbase, let the US do a deal if they want it and spend money on NHS". The govt knows this.

dai-lewis.bsky.social•18 days ago

Don't show the odious Yuan Yi Zhu this!

kc4009.bsky.social•18 days ago

Agreed, over 99 years, the amounts are largely irrelevant.

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply