Assisted dying law closer but MPs' support narrows in historic vote

MPs have paved the way for assisted dying to become legal in England and Wales despite some switching sides to oppose a new law – reducing its majority by more than half.
Kim Leadbeater described backing for her Bill in the Commons as 'a convincing majority', after the number was slashed from 55 in November to 23 on Friday.
The Labour MP declared 'thank goodness' after the result, but hospices are among those warning of the 'seismic change' for end-of-life care.
Staunch supporter Dame Esther Rantzen, who is terminally ill but has said a new law is unlikely to come in time for her, thanked MPs for doing their bit to protect terminally ill people from a 'bad death'.
She told the PA news agency: 'This will make a huge positive difference, protecting millions of terminally ill patients and their families from the agony and loss of dignity created by a bad death.
'Thank you, Parliament.'
While 314 MPs voted for the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill at third reading, 291 voted against.
Some 14 MPs switched from voting in favour to against, while only one MP – Labour's Jack Abbott – switched from voting no to voting yes.
The proposed legislation will now move to the House of Lords for further debate and votes, although one peer has already urged her colleagues they 'must oppose a law that puts the vulnerable at risk'.
Bishop of London Dame Sarah Mullally, a former chief nursing officer for England, said instead work is needed to better fund access to 'desperately needed palliative care services'.
Her sentiment was echoed by a range of end-of-life care organisations including Marie Curie, which said legalising assisted dying will make it 'more crucial than ever' for governments across the UK 'ensure that there is palliative care available for anyone who needs it'.
Ahead of the vote, MPs approved a change to the Bill, which will require ministers to assess within a year of any new law coming into effect the quality and distribution of palliative care services currently available and the impact of an assisted dying service on them.
The charity said while it welcomed the change, 'this will not on its own make the improvements needed to guarantee everyone is able to access the palliative care they need'.
Ms Leadbeater said the vote result was one that 'so many people need', insisting her Bill has enough safeguards and will 'give dying people choice'.
Asked about the narrower gap between supporters and opponents, Ms Leadbeater said she knew there would be 'some movement both ways' but insisted the vote showed a 'convincing majority'.
She told reporters: 'The will of the House (of Commons) will now be respected by the Lords, and the Bill will go through to its next stage.'
Acknowledging those who remain opposed to the Bill, she said she is 'happy to work with them to provide any reassurance or if they've got any questions about the Bill that they want to talk through with me, my door has always been open and remains open'.
Conservative MP Danny Kruger, who opposes the Bill, said support 'is ebbing away very fast', telling of his disappointment the Bill passed but adding: 'The fact is, their majority's been cut in half.'
Campaigners wept, jumped and hugged each other outside Parliament as the vote result was announced, while some MPs appeared visibly emotional as they left the chamber.
Others lined up to shake hands with Ms Leadbeater, the Bill's sponsor through the Commons, with some, including Home Office minister Jess Phillips, stopping to hug the Spen Valley MP.
Before a Bill can be signed into law, both the Lords and the Commons must agree the final text.
Thanks to the four-year implementation period, it could be 2029 – potentially coinciding with the end of this Government's parliament – before assisted dying is offered.
Encouraging or assisting suicide is currently against the law in England and Wales, with a maximum jail sentence of 14 years.
Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer remained supportive of the Bill, voting yes on Friday as he had done last year.
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch, who had urged MPs to vote against the legislation, describing it as 'a bad Bill' despite being 'previously supportive of assisted suicide', voted no.
During an hours-long date on Friday, MPs on both sides of the issue recalled personal stories of loved ones who had died.
Conservative former minister Sir James Cleverly, who led the opposition to the Bill in the Commons, spoke of a close friend who died 'painfully' from cancer.
He said he comes at the divisive issue 'not from a position of faith nor from a position of ignorance', and was driven in his opposition by 'concerns about the practicalities' of the Bill.
MPs had a free vote on the Bill, meaning they decided according to their conscience rather than along party lines.
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 a panel featuring a social worker, senior legal figure and psychiatrist.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

ITV News

12 minutes ago

• ITV News

Mothers of disabled sons campaign for cameras in all care homes

Two mothers are campaigning for a change in the law after secret cameras they installed in their disabled sons' care homes uncovered neglect and poor care. Lindsay Foskett and Sylvia Siddique want cameras to be mandatory in all care settings after they came forward to ITV News with their footage. They have met with the Liberal Democrat leader Ed Davey, who is pledging support for their campaign and to push it through Parliament. Lindsay's son Connor and Sylvia's son Mikey are both disabled adults. Connor has a rare genetic condition, learning disabilities and is autistic and Mikey is blind, autistic and has learning disabilities. Connor needs round-the-clock care, and Mikey has a carer with him at all times throughout the day, as well as being checked every two hours in the night. Their families installed cameras after becoming concerned about the care being delivered. In the footage, Connor was seen eating from the bin in the middle of the night, with no carer in sight. His carers were also seen falling asleep on shift, vaping in his living room, and ignoring him when he tries to communicate. Mikey can be seen sitting in his flat, day after day, with little engagement from carers. He is also left alone for several minutes while a fire alarm goes off in his flat. 'What I witnessed when I installed those CCTV cameras was horrific,' Sylvia told ITV News. Connor and Mikey are not able to fully communicate with their families, and both Lindsay and Sylvia say without the cameras, they would never have known about their sons' treatment. 'If it wasn't for myself fitting CCTV cameras in his flat, I think he would probably not be here.' said Sylvia. 'I never would have known,' adds Lindsay. 'I did have an inkling something was wrong with him. He was in a previous provider where he had bruises on him and he couldn't tell me where they were from. I think it's imperative that we make cameras legal' said Lindsay. 'Something definitely needs to be done. These people, they are way too vulnerable to just be left like this. Once those doors are closed…They can't speak for themselves,' Sylvia added. Sir Ed Davey MP's 17-year-old son John also has complex needs and receives around the clock care at home. The Liberal Democrat leader agreed to back Lindsay and Sylvia's campaign in Parliament. 'I think your campaign is so relevant… Every parent in a way feels this because they know that no one else is going to love and hold their child like they do.' 'One day I won't be here, my wife won't be here, and he may well be in a care home. He can't really communicate very well.' 'I think it is beyond time to act,' he told Lindsay and Sylvia. 'It's important we have a proper debate to make sure we get it right," said Ed Davey. "Action has to be taken, that's going to require a change in the law. 'The liberal argument is clear, it's protecting them because they aren't able to protect themselves.' Cameras are currently only used in care settings on a case by case basis. Unions and human rights groups are likely to oppose any blanket installment of CCTV in all settings. Critics say it could infringe the rights of those being recorded. Sanchita Hosali, the chief executive of the British Institute of Human Rights, told ITV News that while it's very 'human' to turn to CCTV after abuse or neglect is uncovered, it's not necessarily the solution. 'Very often, blanket approaches won't be respectful of people's human rights…We have to think about people's rights to privacy, so the extent to which the people themselves can consent [to cameras in their home].' Ms Hosali also questioned if cameras would actually address the issues at the root of poor care, neglect and abuse. 'If CCTV cameras are the answer, we're probably asking the wrong question. And I think that's the nub of the issue here, is that we're talking about protecting people from inhumane, integrating treatment. A CCTV camera might help with that. 'But the bigger issue is why are they being subjected to inhumane and degrading treatment? And we actually need to address that culture of care first.' Ed Davey says that cameras must be part of wider reform within the care sector, including a register for professionals working in the industry, in line with the General Medical Council for doctors and the Nursing and Midwifery Council. Lindsay's petition has reached more than 40,000 signatures, and the mothers have requested a meeting with the government. Minister of State for Care, Stephen Kinnock told ITV News: 'The findings are shocking, and my thoughts are with Sylvia, Mikey, Lindsay and Connor. 'I have met with the Care Quality Commission recently to discuss these cases and ensure they take the robust and necessary action against providers which fail to treat people with dignity and respect. 'Everyone has the right to receive safe, high-quality care – that is why the Secretary of State has asked the Casey Commission on adult social care to make recommendations on improving standards and strengthening accountability.'

Telegraph

40 minutes ago

• Telegraph

Bullying claims in Parliament up 40pc in a year

Bullying complaints in Parliament have increased by 40 per cent in a year, with MPs most likely to be accused of misconduct. The Independent Complaints and Grievance Scheme (ICGS), which investigates bullying, harassment and sexual wrongdoing in Parliament, said it had seen a spike in complaints in the year to this April, which encompassed the general election. The body's annual report, published on Monday, said it had investigated 69 cases in the year, up from 47 the previous year. The cases were the result of 50 'disclosures' from parliamentary staff, some of which related to multiple individuals. The number of disclosures also increased by 25 per cent, and they were investigated at a total cost of almost £2 million. The ICGS said all but three of the complaints were of bullying and harassment, with the remainder relating to sexual misconduct including assault, harassment, stalking and voyeurism. Only four were upheld, with the remainder withdrawn, found to be out of scope or not completed by the end of the year. The report, which did not give details of individual cases, said the presence of alcohol in Parliament was 'a factor in almost one out of every five complaints investigated' and was 'notably prevalent' in sexual misconduct cases. MPs were the largest group of alleged perpetrators of either bullying, harassment or sexual misconduct, followed by House of Commons employees, staff working for MPs and members of the House of Lords. The ICGS did not explain the reason for the uplift in the number of complaints, which came after more than half of MPs were replaced at the general election. But it said that some of the bullying cases were caused by a 'power imbalance' in the workplace, where managers had 'abused their authority by publicly humiliating staff' or being 'openly critical and dismissive'. 'This behaviour caused complainants to feel insecure about their job stability and created an intimidating work environment,' it said. 'Additionally, it was alleged that managers assigned tasks that were excessively challenging or impossible to complete within the given timeframe, making the complainants feel as though they were being set up to fail.' Criticism over speed of investigations The ICGS was established in 2018 in response to the #MeToo movement and complaints that sexual misconduct was prevalent among MPs and their staff. But it has been criticised for the speed at which it can conduct investigations, with some dragging on for more than a year and involving multiple rounds of analysis by officials. In one case, a complaint was upheld by the ICGS and passed to the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, which investigates the conduct of MPs. The commissioner rejected the complaint, resulting in an appeal to another body, the Independent Expert Panel, which returned it to the commissioner. The appeal was ultimately not upheld. Thea Walton, the director of the ICGS, said: 'During the reporting period, we experienced a notable increase in the number of people contacting the ICGS. We received 25 per cent more disclosures in 2024-25 than in 2023-24. 'Unfortunately, this increase, the complexity of cases and the introduction of new processes and ways of working has contributed to longer timescales for completing cases. Over the next 12 months, the team will be working hard to reduce these timescales while bedding in our new processes and continuing to deliver a high-quality service for the parliamentary community. 'I am encouraged to see that awareness of the ICGS remains high across Parliament and more people are coming forward to use the scheme to seek redress when they feel they have experienced poor behaviour.'

The National

an hour ago

• The National

Westminster parliament bans trans women from female toilets

The website for the UK Parliament now tells visitors that they "should use facilities that correspond to their biological sex or the gender-neutral toilets". In May, a Commons spokesperson said they would await full EHRC guidance before reviewing any policies. It comes after a transgender barrister was accosted by gender critical activists outside of a women's bathroom on the parliamentary estate. The Scottish Parliament banned transwomen from using female facilities on May 9. It comes after the Supreme Court ruled that under the Equality Act 2010, women would be defined by "biological sex" and did not include transwomen with a gender recognition certificate. READ MORE: Scottish Labour MSPs missing more Holyrood votes than Tories and SNP Following the ruling, the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) issued interim guidance that banned transgender people from using the bathroom of their acquired gender. The EHRC currently has a consultation running, with official guidance expected to come at a later, unconfirmed date. Jo Maugham, director of Good Law Project, said: 'The Supreme Court had a whole section of its judgment headed – and here I quote – 'Why this interpretation would not be disadvantageous to or remove protection from trans people with or without a GRC'. 'And you have to ask why the parliamentary estate has chosen to ignore what seems to be the law. It may be expedient in the short term to be dictated to by JK Rowling's billions – but it is going to prove very unwise in the longer term.' The House of Commons has been contacted for comment. (Image: UK Parliament) We previously told how barrister Robin Moira White was attending a meeting of the women and equalities committee in Westminster when she was accosted by gender critical campaigners. White said that Kate Harris, of LGB Alliance, and Heather Binning, Women's Rights Network, began 'shouting' at her and started to cross-examine her on her intentions. Harris has denied shouting at White. The Commons then issued an apology following the confrontation and said White should not have been directed to use the female facilities. It has now changed its policy following the incident. READ MORE: Ex-Labour frontbencher calls for UK Government to reject Rosebank In Holyrood, the Scottish Parliament Corporate Body (SPCB) recently defended its decision to ban transgender people from using certain toilets after being urged to drop the 'unfair' policy. On behalf of the SPCB, Scottish Tory MSP Jackson Carlaw insisted the governing body had 'legal responsibilities'. 'Our job, even though we are politicians, is not to debate the politics of an issue, but to ensure that we are implementing the law as the law is communicated to us,' he said.