Latest news with #RobertJenrick
Scottish Sun
2 hours ago
- Politics
- Scottish Sun
Rape charge against asylum seeker in taxpayer-funded hotel kept quiet to avoid inflaming ‘community tension in cover up'
Nigel Farage has demanded the council officials who hid the truth face the sack 'RAPE COVER-UP' Rape charge against asylum seeker in taxpayer-funded hotel kept quiet to avoid inflaming 'community tension in cover up' A RAPE charge against a man staying in an asylum hotel was kept quiet — as officials feared inflaming 'community tension'. There were also two other rape cases where it was not disclosed that the suspects were in taxpayer-funded asylum hotels. Advertisement 4 Council officials recommended rape charges against an asylum seeker living at a taxpayer-funded hotel be kept quiet Credit: Darren Fletcher Shadow Justice Secretary Robert Jenrick said the 'perception of a migrant cover-up' was growing. He went on: 'The illegal small-boat crossings are a national security emergency. "We've seen terrorism, murders and rapes from those who've come here illegally. It's outrageous. 'Women in towns with asylum hotels shouldn't have to live in fear. Advertisement READ MORE ON ASYLUM SEEKERS BOUND FOR BRITAIN Speaking French & German… migrants booted out of EU heading to Britain The authorities must trust the public with the truth and act to protect them.' The rape suspects were all housed in Home Office-funded accommodation in Portsmouth, London and Manchester. At Portsmouth, the alleged rape was followed by a concerted effort to keep secret the suspect's link to an asylum hotel. He was charged with rape and voyeurism after the alleged attack on a woman on June 11. Advertisement Police confirmed to The Sun he had been at the Royal Beach Hotel in Southsea, used to house asylum seekers. The man appeared at Portsmouth magistrates' court on June 16. He was remanded in custody and is no longer at the hotel. Migrants dodge tear gas in sprint across beach to reach boats bound for Britain No statement was issued about the case but Portsmouth City Council officials were briefed privately. The Sun understands councillors were warned not to speak about the suspect's housing, with one council officer raising fears about 'community tension' if it was known. Advertisement Another senior official privately urged Portsmouth Independents Party leader Cllr George Madgwick not to share 'privileged confidential information' after he took to social media to express his frustration. 4 Reform leader Nigel Farage has called for dismissals of the council officials involved Credit: Getty 4 Robert Jenrick MP has warned the 'perception of a migrant cover-up' was growing Credit: Getty Cllr Madgwick said: 'This is precisely why the public don't trust politicians and public bodies: things are hidden that should be disclosed. Advertisement Anyone involved in any form of cover-up from disclosure to the public should question their role in a publicly funded position.' Reform UK leader Nigel Farage said last night: 'The council officials who hid the truth about these serious allegations should immediately face the sack. "Decent people are getting angrier every day.' Portsmouth City Council effectively admitted it chose not to go public, saying it was informed of the charge ahead of the court hearing but left public statements to police. Advertisement A spokesman said: 'We knew the Home Office accommodation link would become public knowledge through the court proceedings and, based on events elsewhere in the country, were conscious there may be community tensions related to it.' Girl 'sex ordeal' EXCLUSIVE By Alex Diaz A MIGRANT living at an asylum seeker hotel raped a vulnerable 17-year-old girl, a court heard. Mohammed Akbari, 23, allegedly attacked her in bushes after they arranged to go to a park, having first met at a hospital. The teen felt dizzy after Akbari, from Iran, gave her an alcoholic drink, Uxbridge magistrates' court heard. She allegedly told him to stop the assault, in Harmondsworth, West London, on June 9. He claims she consented to sex. Akbari arrived in the UK last year, claiming he is Christian and at risk in Iran. He is in custody and will return to court on July 18. Two similar cases also saw no public statements issued about the suspects' links to asylum housing. One involved a 27-year-old man staying at a hotel in Kensington, West London. He faces multiple charges over a serious sex attack, including rape and attempted rape. Advertisement He pleaded not guilty on June 2 and was remanded in custody before a trial in October. In Manchester, a Jordanian with an asylum claim under way was charged with rape while living at a Home Office-contracted hotel. He appeared at Tameside magistrates' court last month and was remanded in custody until a crown court hearing next week. The man, 34, has yet to enter a plea. Meanwhile, an asylum seeker in a hotel in Yorkshire was charged with raping a girl aged 13 to 15 last Boxing Day. 4 There have been multiple assaults involving asylum seekers across the UK Credit: Alamy Advertisement Last night the Government said: 'We have taken action to ban foreign nationals who commit sexual offences from being granted asylum.' Our revelations come after an illegal migrant was jailed for raping a girl of 15, amid claims he did not understand 'cultural differences'. Afghan national Sadeq Nikzad, 29, pounced on the teen in Falkirk in October 2023. Defence counsel Janice Green told the High Court in Livingston there was a 'cultural barrier' with Nikzad's home nation where child marriage is common. There is no suggestion any of the accused in the three latest rape cases are linked to grooming gangs. Advertisement But the issue of alleged criminality by illegal arrivals was raised in an official report this week. A damning review by Dame Louise Casey found they are involved in a 'significant proportion' of live police investigations into child sex grooming gangs. The report found police and council leaders covered up the scale of Asian grooming gangs since concerns were first raised in 2009 as they feared being called racist or raising community tensions. Additional reporting: RICHARD MORIARTY
The Sun
2 hours ago
- Politics
- The Sun
Rape charge against asylum seeker in taxpayer-funded hotel kept quiet to avoid inflaming ‘community tension in cover up'
A RAPE charge against a man staying in an asylum hotel was kept quiet — as officials feared inflaming 'community tension'. There were also two other rape cases where it was not disclosed that the suspects were in taxpayer-funded asylum hotels. Shadow Justice Secretary Robert Jenrick said the 'perception of a migrant cover-up' was growing. He went on: 'The illegal small-boat crossings are a national security emergency. "We've seen terrorism, murders and rapes from those who've come here illegally. It's outrageous. 'Women in towns with asylum hotels shouldn't have to live in fear. The authorities must trust the public with the truth and act to protect them.' The rape suspects were all housed in Home Office-funded accommodation in Portsmouth, London and Manchester. At Portsmouth, the alleged rape was followed by a concerted effort to keep secret the suspect's link to an asylum hotel. He was charged with rape and voyeurism after the alleged attack on a woman on June 11. Police confirmed to The Sun he had been at the Royal Beach Hotel in Southsea, used to house asylum seekers. The man appeared at Portsmouth magistrates' court on June 16. He was remanded in custody and is no longer at the hotel. No statement was issued about the case but Portsmouth City Council officials were briefed privately. The Sun understands councillors were warned not to speak about the suspect's housing, with one council officer raising fears about 'community tension' if it was known. Another senior official privately urged Portsmouth Independents Party leader Cllr George Madgwick not to share 'privileged confidential information' after he took to social media to express his frustration. 4 4 Cllr Madgwick said: 'This is precisely why the public don't trust politicians and public bodies: things are hidden that should be disclosed. Anyone involved in any form of cover-up from disclosure to the public should question their role in a publicly funded position.' Reform UK leader Nigel Farage said last night: 'The council officials who hid the truth about these serious allegations should immediately face the sack. "Decent people are getting angrier every day.' Portsmouth City Council effectively admitted it chose not to go public, saying it was informed of the charge ahead of the court hearing but left public statements to police. A spokesman said: 'We knew the Home Office accommodation link would become public knowledge through the court proceedings and, based on events elsewhere in the country, were conscious there may be community tensions related to it.' Girl 'sex ordeal' EXCLUSIVE By Alex Diaz A MIGRANT living at an asylum seeker hotel raped a vulnerable 17-year-old girl, a court heard. Mohammed Akbari, 23, allegedly attacked her in bushes after they arranged to go to a park, having first met at a hospital. The teen felt dizzy after Akbari, from Iran, gave her an alcoholic drink, Uxbridge magistrates' court heard. She allegedly told him to stop the assault, in Harmondsworth, West London, on June 9. He claims she consented to sex. Akbari arrived in the UK last year, claiming he is Christian and at risk in Iran. He is in custody and will return to court on July 18. Two similar cases also saw no public statements issued about the suspects' links to asylum housing. One involved a 27-year-old man staying at a hotel in Kensington, West London. He faces multiple charges over a serious sex attack, including rape and attempted rape. He pleaded not guilty on June 2 and was remanded in custody before a trial in October. In Manchester, a Jordanian with an asylum claim under way was charged with rape while living at a Home Office-contracted hotel. He appeared at Tameside magistrates' court last month and was remanded in custody until a crown court hearing next week. The man, 34, has yet to enter a plea. Meanwhile, an asylum seeker in a hotel in Yorkshire was charged with raping a girl aged 13 to 15 last Boxing Day. 4 Last night the Government said: 'We have taken action to ban foreign nationals who commit sexual offences from being granted asylum.' Our revelations come after an illegal migrant was jailed for raping a girl of 15, amid claims he did not understand 'cultural differences'. Afghan national Sadeq Nikzad, 29, pounced on the teen in Falkirk in October 2023. Defence counsel Janice Green told the High Court in Livingston there was a 'cultural barrier' with Nikzad's home nation where child marriage is common. There is no suggestion any of the accused in the three latest rape cases are linked to grooming gangs. But the issue of alleged criminality by illegal arrivals was raised in an official report this week. A damning review by Dame Louise Casey found they are involved in a 'significant proportion' of live police investigations into child sex grooming gangs. The report found police and council leaders covered up the scale of Asian grooming gangs since concerns were first raised in 2009 as they feared being called racist or raising community tensions. 'Axe hate team' By Martina Bet LABOUR'S work on a definition of Islamophobia threatens to shut down efforts to tackle grooming gangs, a report has warned. The party's working group on anti-Muslim hate should be suspended immediately until after the new inquiry into the scandal, think tank Policy Exchange says. Report co-author Sir John Jenkins said a definition would be an 'undeniable act of two-tier policy'. The group says even a non-binding definition risks silencing victims. It comes days after Baroness Casey's report said officials failed to mention that perpetrators were Asian for fear of appearing racist.
Telegraph
8 hours ago
- Politics
- Telegraph
Jenrick: Grooming gang members must face automatic life sentences
Child sexual groomers must face automatic life sentences and should be barred from big discounts on their sentences if they plead guilty, Robert Jenrick has said. Setting out his party's policy in the wake of the Baroness Casey review, the shadow justice secretary said it should be 'the norm' for anyone convicted of a rape or sexual offence involving child grooming to face a life sentence. He said they should also serve consecutive terms where there are multiple victims, instead of the common current practice where the sentences run concurrently. This would mean that a man handed three separate terms of 10 years for rape would have to serve 30 years. Mr Jenrick also proposed that child sexual groomers should be barred from eligibility for a third off their sentence if they plead guilty at their first court hearing, as is currently the case under the discount scheme. The decades-old system is designed to encourage early guilty pleas, which can spare victims the trauma of appearing before a court and also speed up justice. The Tories are also proposing to review overall discounts where a guilty plea earns a quarter off the sentence if entered after the first hearing but before the trial starts. Offenders can also get a tenth off if they plead guilty when the trial begins. Mr Jenrick said: 'There should be no guilty plea discounts for organised sexual exploitation. The privilege should stay only for low-level, non-violent crime where victims genuinely avoid court.' As part of the proposed policy, he said dual nationals convicted of child exploitation should be stripped of their British citizenship and foreign nationals should be deported the 'moment their sentence ends'. Loophole exploited The Home Office has taken such action against two of the ringleaders of the Rochdale grooming gang scandal, Qari Abdul Rauf, a 55-year-old father of five, and Adil Khan, 54, who were jailed in 2012 for their part in raping or sexually assaulting 47 girls, including some as young as 12. But the pair have exploited a loophole by also renouncing their Pakistani citizenship, which has led to a stalemate, with Pakistan refusing to take them back as it no longer recognises them as citizens. Tory sources said they would investigate whether they could close the loophole and would also review the lower tariff discounts to sentences for serious offenders such as child sex groomers. The moves follow low sentences issued to groomers such as Sohail Zaffer, 41, who was jailed for just three years and six months for raping a child, and Manzon Akhtar, imprisoned for four and a half years, also for raping a child. Mr Jenrick said: 'These men have been sentenced but not punished. They are already back out walking the same streets as their victims. 'These were some of the few who were convicted. The Telford inquiry found that more than 1,000 girls were raped and abused, yet just 10 men have been convicted for their crimes.' He said that even when they were prosecuted, serious flaws in the criminal justice system meant that they did not get the longer sentences merited by their crimes. 'Tactical giveaway' 'First, many rape gang trials happened more than 20 years after the abuse. Under Article 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights, judges are forbidden from imposing a harsher penalty than was available at the time of the crime,' he added. 'In the 1990s, indecent assault on a child carried a 10-year cap, not life – so the court's hands were tied, even when the same act today would attract a life tariff. 'Second are discounts. A rapist who pleads guilty at the first hearing is automatically given up to a third off their sentence. The rule was meant to spare victims from cross-examination. In grooming gang cases, it's become a tactical giveaway – the damage is done, victims still relive the abuse in court statements and the perpetrator bags a shorter stretch. 'For group child rape that trade off simply isn't defensible, not least for victims who have waited decades for justice. 'Third is the totality rule: when an offender faces many counts, judges, as bound by the Sentencing Council, must make the overall term 'just and proportionate'. They therefore run most sentences concurrently. 'Mohammed Din was convicted of 11 rapes, each worth well into double digits, but received 14 years in total because the terms all overlap. That's barely a year per rape. 'The result? Derisory jail terms that insult survivors, embolden predators and shred public confidence in justice.'
Telegraph
9 hours ago
- Politics
- Telegraph
Palestine Action must be labelled terrorist group, say Farage and Jenrick
Palestine Action should be proscribed as a terrorist organisation after its activists breached security at an air base to damage two RAF planes, Robert Jenrick and Nigel Farage have said. The pair joined other senior politicians in demanding that the group should be banned over its 'illegal' and 'extremist' actions after activists broke into RAF Brize Norton and sprayed red paint into the engines of two Airbus Voyager aircraft. Mr Jenrick, the shadow justice secretary, told Sir Keir Starmer: 'You are the Prime Minister – do something. Ban Palestine Action. Investigate the security breach.' Mr Farage, the leader of Reform UK, said: 'Palestine Action must be proscribed as a terrorist organisation after the attack on RAF planes at Brize Norton.' Proscribing Palestine Action would make it illegal to be a member of the group, to invite support for it or to wear clothing or carry flags or placards backing it. Anyone caught doing so would face up to 14 years in prison. It would put the group on a par with membership of the Islamic State, Hamas or Al-Qaeda. Lord Walney, a former government adviser on political violence and disruption, said: 'The Government must now act to ban Palestine Action after this grotesque breach of military security. 'With Iran's nuclear programme on the brink and Britain facing rising threats from abroad, we shouldn't let these criminal activists act like the Ayatollah's apparatchiks by attacking the country from within. 'Employees at the workplaces they target have been systematically terrorised by Palestine Action for too long – this is the moment for ministers to proscribe the group as terrorists or enact the new sanctions recommended in my review submitted to Downing Street and the Home Office.' Suella Braverman, a former home secretary, said: 'This is not a legitimate protest. These are the actions of militant extremists who are undermining our national security. Palestine Action should be proscribed and face the full force of the law.' Kemi Badenoch, the Tory leader, is understood to support a ban and urged the Government and police to ensure that the activists responsible faced the 'full force of the law'. 'The security breach at Brize Norton is deeply is not lawful protest, it is politically motivated criminality,' she said. 'We must stop tolerating terrorist or extremist groups that seek to undermine our society. The full force of the law must come down on those responsible.' David Taylor, the Labour MP for Hemel Hempstead, also called for Palestine Action to be proscribed, saying its protest at Brize Norton amounted to 'sabotage'. He added: 'This group have engaged in illegal activity – smashing into defence sites, vandalising property and disrupting key infrastructure. These are not isolated incidents – they are part of a coordinated campaign of unlawful direct action. 'Such behaviour puts lives at risk, undermines public safety and is against British values. It is time for the Government to take a firmer stance. I believe Palestine Action should now be considered for proscription under the Terrorism Act. We cannot allow groups who glorify and incite violence to operate unchecked under the guise of activism.' Palestine Action has been involved in previous violent protests. In January last year, it vandalised an office of the logistics company Kuehne+Nagel in Milton Keynes, smashing windows and spraying the building with paint. Last March, it claimed responsibility for spray-painting a historic portrait of Arthur Balfour at Trinity College, Cambridge. Palestine Action said the action was taken because of the 1917 Balfour declaration, in which the UK backed a separate state for Jewish people. Last November, members broke a glass cabinet in the University of Manchester's Chemistry Building and stole two busts of Chaim Weizmann, the first president of Israel and a former lecturer at the university. In March this year, members of Palestine Action threw red paint on the Old Schools building at the University of Cambridge, calling on the university to divest from companies selling arms to the Israeli military.
Daily Mail
a day ago
- Health
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE Doctors told my Nana she had a short while left. They were wrong. She defied the odds and lived for almost a decade. That's why I'll be voting AGAINST the assisted dying bill: ROBERT JENRICK
Robert Jenrick has made an emotional appeal against assisted dying, as MPs prepare for a momentous vote on whether to let the terminally ill end their own lives. Writing for the Daily Mail below, Mr Jenrick reveals how he helped look after his grandmother, Dorothy, as a teenage boy – and how she continued to bring joy to the family as she defied a terminal diagnosis for nearly a decade. The Shadow Justice Secretary says the prospect of legalising assisted dying 'fills me with dread', adding: 'My Nana felt like she was a burden. I know how much she hated the indignity she felt at having to ask my Mum or us to help her with basic needs. 'People like her – and there are many such people – may consider an assisted death as another act of kindness to us. How wrong they would be.' He goes on: 'Our society pays little regard to end of life care. We need to do much more as a country to help the elderly, like my Nana, in their final years. 'But my experience has taught me that there can be dignity in death, and that even in someone's twilight years, there is joy to be extracted from life. 'So I'll be voting No. And as I do so, I'll be thinking of my great pal – my Nana, Dorothy.' The appeal comes as MPs prepare for a Commons showdown over the contentious issue tomorrow. MPs will hold a final vote tomorrow afternoon on whether to press ahead with the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, which would make it legal to help someone end their own life in certain circumstances for the first time. It will apply only to those with a terminal illness and a diagnosis giving them fewer than six months to live, although critics warn it could be 'the thin end of the wedge'. Labour MP Kim Leadbeater said she was confident the Bill would pass. But campaigners opposed to the legislation last night said the vote was on a 'knife-edge'. The Bill cleared its first Commons hurdle in November with a comfortable majority of 55 votes. But some MPs have suggested they will switch their votes today or abstain. The original legislation has now been amended dozens of times. Ms Leadbeater herself has tabled a further 37, mostly technical amendments to be considered today, while opponents will launch a last-ditch bid to tighten up the Bill, including by barring its use by people suffering from anorexia. Tory leader Kemi Badenoch labelled it a 'bad bill' that will not deliver and urged Conservative MPs to follow suit. 'This has been a free vote. I'm somebody who has been previously supportive of assisted suicide,' Mrs Badenoch said. '[But] this Bill is a bad Bill. It is not going to deliver. It has not been done properly. 'This is not how we should put through legislation like this. I don't believe that the NHS and other services are ready to carry out assisted suicide, so I'll be voting no, and I hope as many Conservative MPs as possible will be supporting me in that.' Former Labour frontbencher Dan Carden became the latest to say he will vote against the Bill after previously abstaining. Mr Carden, leader of the Blue Labour group of MPs, told the Guardian that 'legalising assisted suicide will normalise the choice of death over life, care, respect and love'. He added: 'I genuinely fear the legislation will take us in the wrong direction. The values of family, social bonds, responsibilities, time and community will be diminished, with isolation, atomisation and individualism winning again.' Tory sources said that Rishi Sunak, who backed the Bill at its first stage, is likely to be one of many MPs who decide to miss tomorrow's vote. Downing Street would not say whether Keir Starmer, who backs the principle of assisted dying, will vote. One government insider described the legislation, which has been introduced as a private member's bill, as 'a mess'. 'Even among people who support assisted dying, there are a lot who are not sure this was the best way of going about it,' the source said. 'We would have been better to have let a Royal Commission look at it first.' Supporters of the Bill insist they have put rigorous safeguards in place to prevent vulnerable people being coerced into ending their lives early. Anyone found to have pressured someone to kill themselves could face up to 14 years in prison. But critics warn the protections are too weak – and point to the decision to drop the requirement for all applications to be considered by a High Court judge. The key safeguard was abandoned following warnings it would place too much pressure on court time. Instead, applications will now be considered by a three-person panel featuring a senior legal figure, a psychiatrist and a social worker. A government impact assessment found that within a decade the legislation would see 4,500 people a year end their lives early. It forecast that the premature deaths would save the NHS almost £60million a year in 'unutilised healthcare'. The Government is formally 'neutral' on the issue. Health Secretary Wes Streeting, Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood and Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner are among senior members of the Cabinet who voted against the legislation in November, while Sir Keir and other senior figures such as Rachel Reeves and Yvette Cooper voted in favour. The Government has said it will implement the Bill if it is eventually passed by Parliament. But ministers forced Ms Leadbeater to accept an implementation period of up to four years because of concerns it will prove difficult in practice. My Nana felt like she was a burden. People like her may consider an assisted death as an act of kindness to us... how wrong they would be By Robert Jenrick It was never the plan for my Nana, Dorothy, to live with us. She'd moved from Liverpool to a sheltered flat near our home outside of Wolverhampton to be close to Mum and Dad. But her terminal emphysema made that impossible at times. It was a dreadful thing, leaving her constantly struggling to breathe, reliant on powerful inhalers and later oxygen canisters. So, after a hospital stay, when I was a teenager, she came to our house to recuperate for 'a few weeks'. She ended up staying for years. Her mind remained razor sharp even to the end, but her body gave up. The condition left her barely able to walk down a corridor or across a room. She was in considerable discomfort and often bedbound. Throughout all that, though, her dignity was astonishing. Immaculately turned out. Neatly dressed. Hair coiffed. Every single day. First diagnosed with emphysema, then cancer, doctors gave her a short while to live. They were wrong. She defied the odds and lived for almost a decade. Throughout, my Mum primarily, but also my Dad, my sister and I were her carers. Fetching prescriptions, changing beds, running her to doctors' appointments. There was nothing by way of help. In fact, the day my grandmother died, my Mum came home to a message from the council saying that her condition was not yet serious enough to warrant their support. After Nana became seriously unwell, my mother was loath to leave her side. Looking back, Mum showed a saintlike devotion. She put her whole life on hold for years, as so many carers across the country do. She received no recompense, no reward. This was a duty of love. A multi-generational household has its ups and downs. Teenagers and octogenarians aren't always natural housemates. She found our noise, robust family debates and occasional parties difficult and wasn't shy about saying so. With only one television, battles over my desire to watch teenage comedies and her desire to watch Emmerdale or Corrie raged for years. But there were many happy moments too. Long discussions about the past, the news, and politics, as we sat completing the Daily Mail crossword every day. She encouraged me to go to university and make the most of the opportunities she missed leaving school at 13. Watching her deteriorate was heartbreaking. It affected us all. There was something particularly tragic about someone so sharp, so witty, so aware of the world, stuck in a failing body. Increasingly, she felt a burden. She prized what remained of her independence and hated making a fuss. None of this came easily to her. In her youth, she'd done remarkable things like serving as a volunteer fire warden during the Blitz around St Paul's Cathedral. She'd known the tough times and faced them all with a quiet stoicism. The days before she died were terrible to watch. By then, each breath had become painful, and talking a struggle. It hurts beyond words to see someone you love in that state. I'll always remember the last time we saw each other. I went to see her in hospital. I held her hand and we spoke a little. I kissed her cheek as I left. She whispered, 'we've been great pals, haven't we?' We had. Tomorrow, I'll cast my vote on the Assisted Dying Bill. The legislation lacks basic safeguards. It would allow patients with anorexia to end their life without telling their families. The representative bodies of Pathologists, Psychiatrists, and Palliative doctors all oppose it. Our courts are bound, under human rights challenges, to expand eligibility yet further. The safeguards our courts were supposed to provide when the Bill was first proposed, and which I warned at the time were utterly impractical to deliver, have been stripped out altogether. Then there is the matter of how hard it is to predict when someone might die. This law is meant to only apply to those with less than six months less to live. But speak to any doctor and they'll tell you just how hard that is to predict. The doctors told my Nana that she had just a short while left. They were wrong, like they are in many cases. She lived for almost a decade until her death at the grand old age of 94. With assisted dying legalised, inevitable mistakes like this would be too terrible to contemplate. But for me, it's the examples around the world where assisted dying is legal that prove it's a bad idea. In Oregon, under 30 per cent of the patients dying by assisted dying do so because they're in physical pain. The overwhelming majority die because they fear 'losing autonomy' or feel a 'burden on family, friends and caregivers.' These numbers are the same just about everywhere data is collected. That fills me with dread. My Nana felt like she was a burden. I know how much she hated the indignity she felt at having to ask my Mum or us to help her with basic needs. People like her, and there are many such people, may consider an assisted death as another act of kindness to us. How wrong they would be. It's easy to make laws that work for 80 per cent of people. It's very hard to make them work for everyone. It's Parliament's role to represent that minority, but the Assisted Dying Bill leaves them exposed. There will be people – we all know them in our lives – who are shy, who have low self-esteem, who have demons within them who will feel societal pressure to end their life early. I know plenty of these people. They are often poor. They are vulnerable. They are lonely. Parliament must be their protector. But this Bill fails to uphold that duty. Thousands of people will lose months, if not years, of their life to avoid causing hassle for their family. Thousands more will be haunted by the thought of whether they should do so too. If it wasn't obvious from the data, we know it instinctively. Our society pays little regard to end of life care. We need to do much more as a country to help the elderly, like my Nana, in their final years. But my experience has taught me that there can be dignity in death, and that even in someone's twilight years, there is joy to be extracted from life. So tomorrow, I'll be voting no. And, as I do so, I'll be thinking of my great pal – my Nana, Dorothy.
