Terminally ill people have been left “utterly bewildered” by the failure of the assisted dying Bill, one of its chief backers has said, as opponents again branded it unsafe for the most vulnerable in society.
Bill Collapses Without Vote
Peers sitting for the final day of debate once again made impassioned arguments for and against the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, which is expected to fall on Friday afternoon without a vote. Its sponsor in the House of Lords, Lord Charlie Falconer, said he felt “despondent” that a piece of legislation which he said was “so important to so many, has not failed on its merits, but failed as a result of procedural wrangling”.
More than 1,200 amendments to the Bill – which twice passed votes by MPs in the Commons – had been tabled in the Lords. Of the amendments listed, more than 800 have been tabled or sponsored by seven peers.
Procedural Wrangling Blamed
Lord Falconer said the Bill had not failed to finish its journey through the Lords due to a lack of time, but rather “because a small minority were not willing to cooperate, as we normally do, to ensure that there can be proportionate debate”. He said supporters of the Bill felt let down and that peers have “not treated them properly” while many terminally ill people and their relatives “who have shown such courage and forbearance” have been “utterly bewildered by the way we have behaved”.
Opponents Cite Safeguarding Concerns
But Conservative former deputy prime minister Baroness Therese Coffey – a staunch opponent who acknowledged she had tabled “more amendments than she had expected to” – insisted safeguarding concerns remained key. She told peers: “Being able to check against potential coercion, that is what has worried people concerned about this Bill the most, and that includes people who strongly support the principle. I do fear that many peers and many MPs are putting choice for some ahead of concern on coercion for others.”
Baroness Campbell of Surbiton, a former commissioner at Britain’s rights watchdog the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), said disabled people had contacted her to say this “particular Bill frightens them, and they want me to explain to your Lordships why it is dangerous for them”. The crossbench peer, who has spinal muscular atrophy, and addressed the chamber remotely, said disabled people “fear unequal access to care shaping their choices, they fear subtle coercion that cannot be easily detected”.
Gaps in the Bill
Paralympian Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson said the Bill had failed because “there are too many gaps in it” and said she felt there was “a lot of misunderstanding about what people might get” under a law change. Noting that someone with motor neurone disease (MND) for example would not have been eligible, she said: “I really worry that people on the outside have been promised something that they were never going to get.”
Future of Assisted Dying Legislation
Supporters have vowed to try to bring the Bill back in Parliament’s next session, with its sponsor in the Commons Kim Leadbeater saying she will again enter her name in the ballot of private members’ bills. Campaigners have said they could use the Parliament Act to get the Bill through if it was selected. That Act, a rarely used piece of legislation, allows for Bills that have been backed by the Commons in two successive sessions but rejected by peers to pass into law without Lords approval.
Lord Falconer told peers: “It is clear that the issue will not go away, nor should it, until it is resolved. Parliament can and must come to a decision. It is now for the other place to decide what we do next.”
Calls for Different Approach
Dame Sarah Mullally, the top bishop in the Church of England and a former chief nurse, said if the Bill comes back “we need to do our work differently”. The Archbishop of Canterbury, who sits in the Lords and has spoken out against the Bill, said: “There is no doubt in my mind that this is one of the biggest societal shifts that we are seeing or will see. Therefore, as we have done, we need to take our role seriously.”
Political Reactions
Ms Leadbeater watched from the gallery as peers debated on Friday. Her Bill, which has been making its way through Parliament for the past year and a half, had proposed allowing adults in England and Wales, with fewer than six months to live, to apply for an assisted death subject to the approval of two doctors and an expert panel. The Government remained neutral on the issue and MPs voted according to their consciences rather than along party lines but one Conservative peer said he had been told by some Labour MPs they “felt intimidated” into voting in favour of it.
Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer voted in favour while Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch voted against. Former Tory treasurer Lord Farmer told the Lords: “I’ve spoken to a number of Labour MPs since, and what was not known, possibly, is that there was considerable pressure from Number 10 (to) pass the Bill.” He said it was “known that the Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer supported it”, and suggested Bill supporters were “standing at the entrance to the lobbies taking note of who was going through”. He added: “I’m just passing on what Labour MPs have said to me, that they felt intimidated.”
Asked by reporters on Friday if the PM was disappointed to see the Bill fall, a Number 10 spokesperson said: “He’s spoken about the importance of the Government being neutral on the issue, therefore, explained why he hasn’t spoken on it. As a result, it’s a matter for MPs, it’s a matter for parliamentarians, and that remains the case.”
Ms Badenoch has said the Bill should not be brought back in the next parliamentary session. Speaking to broadcasters on a visit to Swindon, she suggested Labour had “come up with a lot of random campaigns that their activists have brought in”. Challenged over the fact the legislation was a private members’ Bill, she said: “The Government has used a private members’ Bill to push through its agenda. It’s something that Keir Starmer wants to see. He said he made a promise to Esther Rantzen. I think he should focus on the rest of the country.”
Calls for Improved End-of-Life Care
Meanwhile, charities working in palliative and end-of-life care have warned Health Secretary Wes Streeting that momentum sparked by the national conversation on death must not be “wasted”. Mr Streeting, who voted against the Bill in the Commons, is being urged by the specialist palliative care and hospice organisations to use this “critical moment” to bring about the improvement they say is much needed for dying people.
