Assisted dying bill debate could cost taxpayers almost £2 million
Taxpayers face a potential bill of nearly £2 million to colleagues for debating the assisted dying bill in parliament, according to new analysis.
The financial implications come as members of the House of Lords meet again on Friday for a seventh day of debate on proposed legislation in the upper house.
Analysis conducted by Press Association It shows that if current average participation levels continue and the proportion of peers claiming the maximum tax-free allowance of £371 continues, the total cost for peers alone could reach £1.95 million over the 16 days allocated so far for consideration of the Bill.
This figure does not include other operational costs such as security required to seat the House of Lords.
Figures released by the House of Lords confirm that £270,807 was paid to peers for their participation in the second reading of the bill over two days in September.
The lengthy debate sparked criticism, with supporters of the bill accusing some of their colleagues of deliberately wasting time and trying to “talk it out” to ensure that time ran out and failed.
Opponents argue that the legislation requires strict scrutiny and should be strengthened with amendments.
Campaign group My Death, My Decision, which supports assisted dying, said terminally ill patients would think it was worth “every penny” of the predicted total.
However, it faced a “disproportionate” number of changes, more than 1,000.
Disability rights group Not Dead Yet, which opposed the bill, said the extra hearings were important to ensure proper scrutiny was carried out.
In December, the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill was awarded an extra 10-day committee stage due to concerns that colleagues would not have time to debate the more than 1,000 amendments proposed to the Bill.
Supporters of the bill claimed that opponents were trying to slow down the progress of the bill and block it.
A source close to colleagues opposing the bill argued that the legislation was “in such a bad state that the Lords need an extraordinary amount of time to do the job of properly examining these new laws”.
The bill’s proposals would allow people with terminal illnesses who have less than six months to live in England and Wales to apply for assisted dying.
This will need to be approved by a panel that includes two doctors and a social worker, a senior lawyer and a psychiatrist.
It is expected that more days will be allocated in the House of Lords for the bill to become law.
Data analyzed by Press Association It was found that over the six days that members have sat to debate the bill so far, around £733,967 could be claimed by upper house members; an average of £122,327 per session.
Peers can claim a daily allowance of £371 to attend the House of Lords. They can choose to request a discounted price of £185. This is tax free.
This assumes peers at the same rate continue to claim the reduced rate. During two-second reading sessions in September, a maximum of 6.6 percent of peers requested the lower rate.
According to House of Lords attendance figures, if this average was repeated in the next 10-day committee stage, this would mean a total cost of £1,957,245.
This led to the bill for peers rising to £141,709 on 12 September. A week later it dropped to a lower figure of £129,098 due to fewer entries.
The figures came to light after Conservative Lord Farmer wrote to the senior deputy leader of the House of Lords.
A Not Dead Yet UK spokesman said the amount demonstrated the importance of proper scrutiny.
He said: “This bill proposes one of the most fundamental changes to law, medicine and society for generations. It will permanently change the State’s response to death, disability and vulnerability. Careful, line-by-line scrutiny is not an optional extra; Parliament is doing its job.”
“If the overall cost of the Lords’ review approaches £2 million, that would reflect the scale and seriousness of what is being proposed, not obstruction.”
Nathan Stilwell, campaign manager at My Death, My Decision, said: “For terminally ill patients, if this cost results in a safe, compassionate choice at the end of life, many will say it is worth every penny.
“But we have to be honest about what is driving up costs: A small number of our colleagues have proposed a disproportionate amount of changes, and discussions have moved too quickly.”
Darren Hughes, chief executive of the Electoral Reform Association, said this added to the reasons for making the House of Lords a “democratic chamber”.
Mr Hughes said: “Debates on this and other new bills have highlighted the serious democratic deficit in the House of Lords.
“People will rightly be upset that completely unelected and unaccountable politicians are making decisions that will potentially affect everyone in this country.
“Keir Starmer has described unelected lords as ‘indefensible’ and this incident further underlines the need for the government to deliver on its promise to transform the upper house into a democratic chamber.”
