Labour’s controversial Chagos Islands deal could have paid the energy bills for over 17 million Britons.

According to Sir Keir Starmer, the cost of the deal to lease back Diego Garcia, the home of a naval base shared between the US and the UK, was £3.4billion.

However, the Conservatives have a much different number, putting the cost at closer to £30billion.

The Prime Minister came under a grilling from GB News as Starmer was asked about if the money spent on the deal could be used for domestic purposes.

According to the Tories, the UK is set to pay £101million for 99 years, which is equivalent to just under £10bn in total meaning that once supplementary payments and inflationare taken into account, the figure comes out to closer to £30bn.

However, Labour has taken a different approach putting the figure in today’s money, in what it describes as the “net present value.”

The Times reports that because £1 in today’s money is far less than the value of £1 in 2124, the Government has used something called a “GDP deflator” to strip out the impact of inflation, when combined with “social time preference” Labour’s figure has been placed closer to £3.4bn.

Labour has argued that government accountants and economists to compare the cost of long-term projects in today’s money.

Earlier today, GB News reported the average annual bill for a typical household will drop around £11 a month, bringing the total to £1,720 on average per year.

Using the Government’s number, this would mean the £3.4billion set to be spent on the Chagos deal could instead cover the energy bills for 1.976 million people for one year.

However, if you use the Tories’ figures, the cost could cover the energy bills for one year for 17.441 million.

Responding to GB News questions surrounding the deal, Sir Keir Starmer said: “The first duty of a Prime Minister is to keep the country safe and secure, and this base is vital in that respect – its location, its physical use, and its capability, including its spectrum capability

“When measured against other defence spending, it costs less year on year than running an aircraft carrier without the aircraft.”