Peers Accuse Assisted Dying Bill Supporters of Ignoring Critical Flaws as Legislation Faces Collapse
A cross-party group of more than 50 peers has squarely placed the blame for the impending failure of assisted dying legislation on its supporters, who they claim are refusing to address what they describe as 'massive flaws' in the proposed law. The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, which aims to permit terminally ill adults in England and Wales with fewer than six months to live to apply for an assisted death, is widely expected to fall as the House of Lords runs out of time to conclude its debates before the current parliamentary session ends.
Procedural Tactics and Legislative Blockades
Opponents of assisted dying have been accused of employing 'procedural tactics' to obstruct the bill, with over 1,000 amendments tabled in the upper chamber. However, supporters argue that there are 'loads' of backbench MPs ready to revive the legislation when the next parliamentary session begins on 13 May. They have suggested that if peers continue to block the bill, supporters could utilise the Parliament Acts of 1911 and 1941 to bypass the House of Lords entirely.
In a strongly worded letter to all MPs, the cross-party group of peers urged the House of Commons not to 'force through' the bill in its current form. They expressed deep concerns that campaigners 'now appear determined to force this Bill on to the statute book unamended', highlighting a lack of willingness to engage with substantive issues.
Safety and Workability Concerns Raised
Labour peer Luciana Berger, one of the signatories, stated unequivocally: 'The Bill will fall because supporters have refused to engage with its massive flaws.' She emphasised that the legislation is 'unsafe and unworkable', noting that none of the relevant medical Royal Colleges, professional groups, advocacy organisations, or even the Government's own ministers have endorsed it as safe. Berger warned, 'It is a danger to the vulnerable and a huge risk to our NHS. Whatever MPs may think of the principle of assisted dying, it is clear that this Bill is not fit for purpose.'
A source close to Labour MPs and peers opposed to the bill added, 'Supporters of the Bill aren't trying to improve it. Out of over 700 amendments already considered in the Lords, they've indicated they would accept only two. That's not scrutiny; that is stonewalling.'
Cross-Party Opposition and Key Issues
The letter was signed by prominent figures including Conservative former attorney general Victoria Prentis, Labour peers Sue Gray, Marvin Rees, and Paul Boateng, and former Northern Ireland first minister Arlene Foster. They outlined significant unresolved issues such as delegated powers, lethal substances, advertising, codes of practice, death investigations, notification requirements, independent advocates, and cross-border complications.
Introduced to Parliament in October 2024 as a Private Members' Bill by Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, the peers warned that using a PMB for such a sensitive and large-scale change is the 'wrong vehicle'. They noted that past conscience issues handled via PMBs were preceded by pre-legislative scrutiny, such as commissions, which this bill lacks.
Risks to NHS and Healthcare Priorities
The peers raised alarms that the Government might need to divert funds from existing NHS budgets to finance assisted dying, potentially incentivising doctors and nurses to prioritise cost-effective assisted deaths over palliative care. They stressed, 'The Commons should have the opportunity to consider material issues it has not yet examined and address the legitimate concerns of those professionals who would have to deliver it.'
As peers began their 13th day of line-by-line scrutiny at the committee stage, the bill's future remains precarious. For it to become law, it must clear further revising stages in the Lords and achieve final agreement from both Houses. When the next parliamentary session commences, MPs will have the chance to propose new PMBs, with a ballot determining which receive priority debate.
