MPs face huge decision as they vote on historic assisted dying bill

MPs will today decide whether assisted dying should be legalised, with historic legislation on a knife-edge.
Campaigners have called on MPs to change the law to give terminally ill people expected to live less than six months more control over how they die. But critics have voiced concerns about safeguards and warn it will set a "dangerous" precedent.
The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill has been undergoing intense Commons scrutiny since November, when it passed its first hurdle by 330 votes to 275, a majority of 55. But some MPs have changed their mind since then, meaning it could go down to the wire.
We'll be following the debate throughout the day.
A terminally ill grandmother today tells MPs: 'I've had a good life, I would like the choice of a good death.'
Jane Popplewell, 63, has been diagnosed with sarcoma, a rare and aggressive form of cancer, and fears she could die in pain.
Explaining why she backs Kim Leadbeater's assisted dying bill she said: 'I feel passionately about this. It's about choice in a liberal society. My understanding is about 80% of the electorate are in favour. It's not about forcing it on anyone. It's about not dying in an undignified or painful way. Who would want that?
'When you have a terminal illness, the fact it might happen to you, it's difficult to imagine what that's like until it does. Who knows what my end will be like. I've led a good life and I would like the choice of a good death. I feel that everyone should have the right to that choice.'
Click here for the full story
Opponents of the assisted dying Bill last night called on MPs to vote it down.
In an impassioned letter four Labour MPs said the legislation "simply does not do enough" to protect the vulnerable. The backbenchers wrote: "Some people lack the capacity to choose.
"Some people's ability to choose is clouded by their mental health. Some people are coerced into making a decision they didn't want to make.
"And some people may make choices that they wouldn't otherwise make with full sight of the facts." The four - Markus Campbell-Savours, Kanishka Narayan, Paul Foster and Jonathan Hinder - said many live longer than medics predict
They pointed to reports that one in five patients given six months to live go on to have three years or more.. No one should be robbed of the possibility of an extra three years of precious memories with loved ones," they wrote.
Fellow Labour MP Dan Carden (pictured below) yesterday said he had switched against the Bill, having previously abstained. He said: 'Legalising assisted suicide will normalise the choice of death over life, care, respect and love.'
The Bill is back for third reading, which is the first time MPs will vote on the overall bill since November. Some amendments may be voted on before the debate turns to the whole Bill.
At the last vote in November, MPs backed it by 330 to 275, majority 55, to give the bill second reading. Some MPs could change their vote so both camps have been closely monitoring the numbers.
If it passes, then it will move onto the House of Lords for further scrutiny. It could return to the Commons if peers try to amend it, in a process known as "ping pong". But the Lords is not supposed to frustrate a piece of legislation passed by the Commons, as MPs are elected by the public and peers are not.
If the bill doesn't pass, it falls - meaning it won't become law. It is unlikely another attempt to legalise assisted dying would be made for years if this one doesn't pass.
A vote would be expected to take place mid-afternoon.
The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, introduced by Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, would change the law to allow adults with a terminal illness in England and Wales to apply for an assisted death.
The person needs to have fewer than six months to live and have the mental capacity to make the choice. Their decision must be "clear, settled and informed" at every stage - and free from coercion.
The application would be subject to approval by two doctors and an expert panel featuring a social worker, senior legal figure and psychiatrist.
The terminally ill person would take an approved substance to end their life. The bill doesn't specify what drug. This will be provided by a doctor but only the person can take it - they cannot be fed it by someone else.
Doctors won't be forced to take part in assisted dying as MPs have inserted a new clause to make this explicit. This also applies to anyone else who could be involved, such as care workers and pharmacists.
Independent advocates will be created to support people with learning disabilities, autism or mental health conditions, as well as a disability advisory board.
Other amendments made include banning assisted dying adverts and a ban on medics being able to raise the idea with anyone under 18.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Western Telegraph

22 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.

Daily Mail​

30 minutes ago

• Daily Mail​

Labour's work to devise official definition of 'Islamophobia' should be suspended IMMEDIATELY as it risks worsening grooming gangs scandal, report warns

Labour moves to draw up an official definition of Islamophobia would shut down efforts to combat grooming gangs, a new report warns. The Policy Exchange think-tank said the work of the Government's 'Anti-Muslim Hate/Islamophobia Definition Working Group', set up earlier this year, should be immediately suspended. Devising a government-backed definition of Islamophobia – even though it would not initially have any force in law – would 'almost certainly turbocharge cancel culture ', it said. Policy Exchange's warning came days after a long-awaited review by Whitehall troubleshooter Baroness Casey found public bodies covered up sickening evidence about Asian grooming gangs 'for fear of appearing racist '. Councils, police forces and the Home Office repeatedly 'shied away' from dealing with 'uncomfortable' questions about the ethnicity of rapists preying on thousands of vulnerable girls. In the wake of the Casey review, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper promised to 'root out' the grooming gang 'scourge'. But Policy Exchange's report warns: 'At the same time, ministers are pursuing a policy which will have the opposite effect. 'It would have made exposing the grooming scandal even harder and slower than it already was. It will make rooting out the scourge more difficult. It will give perpetrators a new place to hide.' Ministers said in March that the move to devise a definition would 'seek to provide the government and other relevant bodies with an understanding of unacceptable treatment and prejudice against Muslim communities'. It would not carry statutory power, at least initially, but there have been widespread concerns that it would lead to Islam being given protections beyond those afforded to other religions. The work is being led by former Tory attorney general Dominic Grieve KC. Policy Exchange senior fellow and former British ambassador to Saudi Arabia, Sir John Jenkins, said in a letter to Mr Grieve: 'Whatever form of words is chosen, and whatever legal status it has to start with, any definition will have serious consequences. 'It will almost certainly turbocharge 'cancel culture'. 'Even without the force of an official definition, claims of Islamophobia are already used to close down legitimate debate and deter investigation of alleged wrongdoing, as in Rotherham or Batley, with disastrous results all round, including for the wider Muslim community itself.' He added: 'Unless it literally restates the existing legal protections covering all faiths, any official Islamophobia definition will be an undeniable act of two-tier policy, creating special status and protection for members of one faith alone. 'It is unlikely to alleviate Islamist discontent – it will stoke it, creating new opportunities for grievance politics, challenge and attack in every institution and workplace.' Sir John said the working group 'may have begun its work with its conclusions pre-determined', adding that he had 'little confidence' it would approach key issues with an open mind. The report said the government's work should be put on hold until the end of a national inquiry on grooming gangs, which Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer belatedly ordered in the wake of the Casey review. Dr Paul Stott, head of security and extremism at Policy Exchange, said: ''A danger going forward is that the proposed 'Islamophobia' definition could shut down discussion on grooming gangs and if accepted by Government restrict debate on this and on other issues vital to our social cohesion.' He added: 'This week has demonstrated the need to move on from the view that concern about grooming gangs is in some way racist, Islamophobic, or a far-right issue. 'It is clearly not and it never was.'

Edinburgh Reporter

32 minutes ago

• Edinburgh Reporter

Council agrees to trial a four day working week

After Thursday's meeting of the full council, councillors have agreed to consider moving to a four day week to improve the wellbeing of employees. Cllr Claire Miller who proposed the idea suggested it would also help to tackle overuse of agency workers, and boost the council's productivity. Supported overwhelmingly by the Green, SNP, Labour and Liberal Democrat council groups, officers have been instructed to prepare a report outlining how this innovative policy could be adopted for the capital. Cllr Miller said: 'When faced with the need for budget cuts every year, it's a joy to find a proposal which helps to save money while also being beneficial rather than detrimental. And the four day week is just that. 'The four day week is one where services remain as-is – there are no changes as far as residents are concerned, either in opening hours or what's provided – but our workers deliver in a reduced working week. Studies of four day weeks show that productivity remains the same, or in some cases even improves, when the number of hours worked is reduced down and a greater proportion of the week is given back to people for their other responsibilities, for rest and for leisure.' In a written deputation to the Council meeting, the Campaign Director of the 4 Day Week Campaign cited a trial undertaken by South Cambridgeshire District Council: 'The key takeaway from South Cambridgeshire's experience is that a well-structured four-day week can improve productivity, boost recruitment and wellbeing, and—crucially—save taxpayers money. With hundreds of companies across the UK already successfully adopting a four-day week, and the results of the Scottish Government's public sector pilot out next month, now is a great time for the council to embark on this journey.' Representatives from both Unite and Unison trades unions, who represent council staff, also spoke in favour of the motion and urged councillors to prioritise this long-held ask of workers' rights organisations. Like this: Like Related