Oral Answers to Questions

Suella Braverman Excerpts

Monday 10th February 2025 Commons Chamber

[Luke Pollard]

Clyde is an important base for our national security. It is one of our critical military assets, and we work closely on it, not just with the Scottish Government and local councils, but across the entirety of Government. The success of our defence does not rely just on the actions and decisions of the Ministry of Defence; it is a whole-of-Government approach that keeps our nation safe. In these more difficult times, we will ask for more of a whole-of-Government approach, to ensure that the men and women of our fighting forces, and the civilians who support them, have what they need to keep our nation safe.

[Suella Braverman (Fareham and Waterlooville) (Con)]

The proposed AQUIND interconnector between France and England will slice through my constituency, causing huge disruption, but of more significant concern is the fact that the Ministry of Defence has raised serious national security concerns about the proposed submarine power cable. Does the Minister agree that we cannot do anything to jeopardise our national security, and will he formally lodge an objection with the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, who will consider the proposal?

[Luke Pollard]

I am familiar with the campaigning work of my hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth South (Stephen Morgan), who has raised similar concerns. If the right hon. Lady writes to me about that, I will be happy to meet her to discuss it further.

--- Later in debate ---

[Al Carns]

Absolutely. Birmingham has a cluster of fantastic hospital and medical care facilities, as well as the Royal Centre for Defence Medicine. I would love to visit, and I hope I can do so in due course.

[Suella Braverman (Fareham and Waterlooville) (Con)]

I think I am right in saying that I am the only Member of the House of Commons, if not Parliament as a whole, to have Mauritian heritage; if I am wrong about that, I am happy to be corrected. Why does the Secretary of State not see that the proposed deal between the United Kingdom and Mauritius is a dangerous one because of the increase in China’s access to the islands near Diego Garcia, an unaffordable one—whether it is £9 billion, £18 billion or £52 billion, that is money that should go to our armed forces—and, above all, a humiliating one in the eyes of the Mauritians, the Americans and the international community? Why will he not scrap it?

[John Healey]

The deal with the Mauritians is designed to secure the long-term operation and the legal base, and to guarantee our ability and that of our allies in the US to continue to operate from Diego Garcia for at least the next century.