Moment of truth for the assisted dying bill: all you need to know

Kim Leadbeater, the Labour MP who came top in the private members' bill ballot last year, and was therefore given a chance of getting her own law onto the statute book, is 'confident' that her Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill will complete its Commons stages on Friday.
The bill has been through an arduous and often bad-tempered journey since MPs voted to give it the go-ahead in principle in November by 330 votes to 275, a majority of 55.
It was debated by a committee of MPs in 29 sittings between January and March. The committee considered 500 amendments and about one-third were agreed.
The bill came back to the Commons last Friday, when further amendments were debated. Tomorrow will be its last day in the Commons, when more amendments will be debated and a final vote held. If it passes, it will then go to the House of Lords.
How has the bill been amended?
The main change is that, instead of a court having to approve a request, supported by two doctors, for an assisted death, it will be decided by a panel consisting of a lawyer, a consultant psychiatrist and a social worker.
Other amendments include:
• requiring the doctors assessing assisted dying requests to have undertaken detailed training on domestic abuse, including coercive control and financial abuse;
• making independent advocates available for those who 'may experience substantial difficulty in understanding the processes or information relevant' to the assisted dying process; and
• increasing the commencement period from two years to four years in England, meaning that the majority of the bill's provisions must be implemented within four years of the bill becoming law.
Is the bill going to pass?
Almost certainly. The majority of 55 in November was larger than expected, and although some MPs have changed their minds since then, it seems unlikely that there are 28 of them – the number required to change the outcome. Indeed, some of those changing their minds have gone from abstaining last time to supporting the bill, saying that they are now satisfied with the safeguards in the bill.
However, it is MPs switching from support or a neutral position to opposition who tend to attract the most attention. Four Labour MPs who supported the bill in November but who will vote against it tomorrow have written to their colleagues urging them to do the same. 'This is not a normal bill,' they write. 'It fundamentally alters the relationship between doctor and patient. It strips power away from parliament and concentrates it in the hands of future health secretaries.'
They conclude: 'The bill before us simply does not do enough to safeguard people who may want to choose to live.'
The opposition from outside parliament has been forceful. Some MPs are particularly disconcerted by the Royal College of Psychiatrists, which continues to oppose the bill. Although it says it is not opposed to the principle of assisted dying, it is worried about the implications for mental health and says that there are not enough consultant psychiatrists to sit on the expert panels.
Even so, Leadbeater's confidence appears to be justified.
Where do cabinet ministers stand?
Assisted dying is an issue of conscience, and so by convention, the government has allowed a free vote. The government does not have a view on the issue, and collective ministerial responsibility does not apply. That means that some ministers will vote in favour and some against.
Seven ministers who attend cabinet are opposed to the bill: Darren Jones, David Lammy, Shabana Mahmood, Bridget Phillipson, Angela Rayner, Jonathan Reynolds and Wes Streeting. Streeting has changed his mind: he said last year that the poor state of NHS palliative care meant that he could not support the bill.
All the rest support the bill, including the prime minister, who reaffirmed his support this week – apart from Ian Murray, the Scottish secretary, who will not vote on the grounds that the issue is devolved. The Scottish parliament voted for a similar bill at its first stage last month.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Western Telegraph

32 minutes ago

• Western Telegraph

MPs share their own stories as assisted dying debate continues

Debating the proposal to roll out assisted dying in the UK, Sir James Cleverly described losing his 'closest friend earlier this year' and said his opposition did not come from 'a position of ignorance'. The Conservative former minister said he and 'the vast majority' of lawmakers were 'sympathetic with the underlying motivation of' the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, 'which is to ease suffering in others and to try and avoid suffering where possible'. I have seen someone suffering – my closest friend earlier this year died painfully of oesophageal cancer and I was with him in the final weeks of his life. So I come at this not from a position of faith nor from a position of ignorance Sir James Cleverly But he warned MPs not to 'sub-contract' scrutiny of the draft new law to peers, if the Bill clears the Commons after Friday's third reading debate. Backing the proposal, Conservative MP Mark Garnier said 'the time has come where we need to end suffering where suffering can be put aside, and not try to do something which is going to be super perfect and allow too many more people to suffer in the future'. He told MPs that his mother died after a 'huge amount of pain', following a diagnosis in 2012 of pancreatic cancer. Sir James, who described himself as an atheist, said: 'I've had this said to me on a number of occasions, 'if you had seen someone suffering, you would agree with this Bill'. 'Well, Mr Speaker, I have seen someone suffering – my closest friend earlier this year died painfully of oesophageal cancer and I was with him in the final weeks of his life. 'So I come at this not from a position of faith nor from a position of ignorance.' Labour MP Siobhain McDonagh spoke int he assisted dying debate (House of Commons/PA) Labour MP for Mitcham and Morden Dame Siobhain McDonagh intervened in Sir James's speech and said: 'On Tuesday, it is the second anniversary of my sister's death. 'Three weeks prior to her death, we took her to hospital because she had a blood infection, and in spite of agreeing to allow her into intensive care to sort out that blood infection, the consultant decided that she shouldn't go because she had a brain tumour and she was going to die. 'She was going to die, but not at that moment. 'I'm sure Mr Speaker can understand that a very big row ensued. I won that row. 'She was made well, she came home and she died peacefully. What does (Sir James) think would happen in identical circumstances, if this Bill existed?' Sir James replied: 'She asks me to speculate into a set of circumstances which are personal and painful, and I suspect she and I both know that the outcome could have been very, very different, and the the moments that she had with her sister, just like the moments I had with my dear friend, those moments might have been lost.' He had earlier said MPs 'were promised the gold-standard, a judicially underpinned set of protections and safeguards', which were removed when a committee of MPs scrutinised the Bill. He added: 'I've also heard where people are saying, 'well, there are problems, there are still issues, there are still concerns I have', well, 'the Lords will have their work to do'. 'But I don't think it is right and none of us should think that it is right to sub-contract our job to the other place (the House of Lords).' Mr Garnier, who is also a former minister, told the Commons he had watched 'the start of the decline for something as painful and as difficult as pancreatic cancer' after his mother's diagnosis. 'My mother wasn't frightened of dying at all,' he continued. 'My mother would talk about it and she knew that she was going to die, but she was terrified of the pain, and on many occasions she said to me and Caroline my wife, 'can we make it end?' 'And of course we couldn't, but she had very, very good care from the NHS.' Conservative MP Mark Garnier said he would back the Bill (PA) Mr Garnier later added: 'Contrary to this, I found myself two or three years ago going to the memorial service of one of my constituents who was a truly wonderful person, and she too had died of pancreatic cancer. 'But because she had been in Spain at the time – she spent quite a lot of time in Spain with her husband – she had the opportunity to go through the state-provided assisted dying programme that they do there. 'And I spoke to her widower – very briefly, but I spoke to him – and he was fascinating about it. He said it was an extraordinary, incredibly sad thing to have gone through, but it was something that made her suffering much less.' He said he was 'yet to be persuaded' that paving the way for assisted dying was 'a bad thing to do', and added: 'The only way I can possibly end today is by going through the 'aye' lobby.' If MPs back the Bill at third reading, it will face further scrutiny in the House of Lords at a later date.

BBC News

42 minutes ago

• BBC News

MPs make case for and against assisted dying bill

MPs are debating whether to allow terminally ill adults to end their own lives, ahead of a crucial vote in the House of vote will take place at about 2pm and if MPs back the bill, proposed by Labour's Kim Leadbeater, it will go to the House of Lords for further the Commons first voted on the bill last year, it passed with a majority of 55 - since then at least a dozen MPs have switched to opposing the bill, but Leadbeater has said she is confident it will pass. Opening the debate in Parliament, Leadbeater told MPs: "Either we vote for the safe effective workable reform contained in this bill or we say the status quo is acceptable." She recounted stories from terminally ill people and their families including a man called Warwick whose wife Ann "begged him to put an end to her suffering - but he didn't want the last memory she had of him to be stood over her with a pillow".The last time MPs debated a bill to introduce assisted dying was in 2015 and Leadbeater said it "fills me with despair to think MPs could be here in another 10 years time hearing the same stories".She added: "If we don't vote to change the law today what does that mean? It means we will have many more years of heart-breaking stories from terminally ill people and their families, of pain and trauma, suicide attempts, PTSD, lonely trips to Switzerland, police investigations and everything else we have all heard over recent months." Speaking against the bill, Conservative MP James Cleverly said he was struck by the number of medical professional bodies who were neutral on the principle of assisted dying but were opposed to the specific measures in the bill. "When the people upon whom we rely to deliver this say we are not ready... we should listen," he said. He also disagreed with Leadbeater that it was a "now or never moment" arguing that there would be "plenty of opportunities" to return to the subject in the future. Labour's Diane Abbott - the longest serving female MP in the House of Commons - said there was "no doubt that if this bill is passed in its current form, people will lose their lives who do not need to, and they will be amongst the most vulnerable and marginalised in our society".Another Labour MP Peter Prinsley recounted his experience as a doctor and said he believed the bill would give terminally ill people "final peace of mind". "There is an absolute sanctity of human life, but we are not dealing with life or death - we are dealing with death or death."For there is also a sanctity of human dignity and fundamental to that is surely choice - who we to deny that to the dying?" At the start of the day, MPs voted on a series of amendments that had been debated last included a measure to close the so-called "anorexia loophole" which would stop people qualifying for assisted dying on the basis of life-threatening backed that amendment as well as one requiring the government to publish a review of palliative care services within a year of the bill passing. Attempts to block access to assisted dying for people suffering mental health problems or because they feel "burdensome" was defeated by a majority of 53.

Rhyl Journal

44 minutes ago

• Rhyl Journal

Assisted dying Bill not now or never moment, says Cleverly ahead of crucial vote

The House of Commons is debating a Bill to change the law in England and Wales, ahead of a crunch afternoon vote. The outcome would lead to the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill either clearing the House of Commons and moving to the Lords, or falling completely – with a warning the latter could mean the issue might not return to Westminster for a decade. The relatively narrow majority of 55 from the historic yes vote in November means every vote will count on Friday. Some MPs have already confirmed they will switch sides to oppose a Bill they describe as 'drastically weakened', after a High Court judge safeguard was scrapped and replaced with expert panels. As it stands, the proposed legislation would allow terminally ill adults in England and Wales with fewer than six months to live to apply for an assisted death, subject to approval by two doctors and the three-member panel featuring a social worker, senior legal figure and psychiatrist. Bill sponsor Kim Leadbeater has insisted the multidisciplinary panels represent a strengthening of the legislation, incorporating wider expert knowledge to assess assisted dying applications. Opening her debate, Ms Leadbeater said her Bill is 'cogent' and 'workable', with 'one simple thread running through it – the need to correct the profound injustices of the status quo and to offer a compassionate and safe choice to terminally ill people who want to make it'. She pushed back on concerns raised about the Bill by some doctors and medical bodies, including the Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych), noting: 'We have different views in this House and different people in different professions have different views.' She noted that all the royal colleges have a neutral position on assisted dying. Some members of RCPsych also wrote recently to distance themselves from the college's criticism of the Bill and pledge their support for it. MPs have a free vote on the Bill, meaning they decide according to their conscience rather than along party lines – although voting is not mandatory and others present on Friday could formally abstain. Ms Leadbeater warned that choosing not to support the assisted dying Bill is 'not a neutral act', but rather 'a vote for the status quo'. Repeating her warning that the issue is unlikely to be broached again for a decade if her Bill fails, she told the Commons: 'It fills me with despair to think MPs could be here in another 10 years' time hearing the same stories.' But, leading opposition to the Bill, Conservative former minister Sir James said while this is 'an important moment', there will be 'plenty of opportunities' in future for the issue to be discussed. Sir James said: 'I disagree with her (Ms Leadbeater's) assessment that it is now or never, and it is this Bill or no Bill, and that to vote against this at third reading is a vote to maintain the status quo. 'None of those things are true. There will be plenty of opportunities.' The Bill would fall if 28 MPs switched directly from voting yes to no, but only if all other MPs voted the same way as in November, including those who abstained. Ms Leadbeater this week appeared to remain confident her Bill will pass, acknowledging that while she expected 'some small movement in the middle', she did not 'anticipate that that majority would be heavily eroded'. All eyes will be on whether Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and senior colleagues continue their support for the Bill. Sir Keir indicated earlier this week that he had not changed his mind since voting yes last year, saying his 'position is long-standing and well-known'. Health Secretary Wes Streeting described Ms Leadbeater's work on the proposed legislation as 'extremely helpful', but confirmed in April that he still intended to vote against it. Ahead of the debate, Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch urged her MPs to vote against the legislation, describing it as 'a bad Bill' despite being 'previously supportive of assisted suicide'. A vote must be called before 2.30pm, as per parliamentary procedure. Friday's session began with considerations of outstanding amendments to the Bill, including one to prevent a person meeting the requirements for an assisted death 'solely as a result of voluntarily stopping eating or drinking'. The amendment – accepted without the need for a vote – combined with existing safeguards in the Bill, would rule out people with eating disorders falling into its scope, Ms Leadbeater has said. Another amendment, requiring ministers to report within a year of the Bill passing on how assisted dying could affect palliative care, was also approved by MPs. Marie Curie welcomed the amendment, but warned that 'this will not on its own make the improvements needed to guarantee everyone is able to access the palliative care they need' and urged a palliative care strategy for England 'supported by a sustainable funding settlement – which puts palliative and end of life care at the heart of NHS priorities for the coming years'. Supporters and opponents of a change in the law gathered at Westminster early on Friday, holding placards saying 'Let us choose' and 'Don't make doctors killers'. Among the high-profile supporters were Dame Prue Leith, who said she is 'quietly confident' about the outcome of the vote, and Dame Esther Rantzen's daughter Rebecca Wilcox. Opposition campaigner and disability advocate George Fielding turned out to urge parliamentarians to vote no, saying: 'What MPs are deciding on is whether they want to give people assistance to die before they have assistance to live.' A YouGov poll of 2,003 adults in Great Britain, surveyed last month and published on Thursday, suggested public support for the Bill remains at 73% – unchanged from November. The proportion of people who feel assisted dying should be legal in principle has risen slightly, to 75% from 73% in November.