Peers trying to block assisted dying, claims MP behind bill Kim Leadbeater
The Labor MP behind the bill to legalize assisted dying in England and Wales has said he is concerned that some members of the House of Lords are trying to “block” it from becoming law.
Kim Leadbeater has warned that the law is approaching “breaking point” after the number of amendments proposed in the Lords rose to more than 1,000.
The bill, which was passed by MPs in a historic vote in June, must be approved by both Houses of Parliament before becoming law.
But peers are making very slow progress in examining this; This means it will almost certainly need to be devoted to more discussion sessions to avoid running out of time unless it ramps up.
The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill passed its first stage in the House of Lords in September, but will only become law if MPs and peers can agree on final wording before the current session of Parliament ends in the spring.
In two of the four days devoted to the committee phase, where the bill will be examined line by line, colleagues have debated fewer than 30 of the amendments so far.
Passage of the bill was complicated by the fact that it was put forward by Leadbeater, a backbench MP, rather than the government, a category of bills that are vulnerable to the debate deadline expiring.
On Friday, they spent the full four hours allotted for the day debating a set of 21 changes to safety measures designed to prevent people from being forced or encouraged to die with assistance.
Speaking after Friday’s debate, Leadbeater told the BBC he respected those who had concerns, adding that most of his colleagues “went into this in good faith” and “I know the Lords want to do a good job.”
But he added that some of the discussions in the Lords were “repetitive”, while some of the issues raised by his colleagues had already been “discussed at length” by MPs.
Adding that “in practice, the protection is there”, she said: “I do worry that some of the processes and procedures that can be used are being used to frustrate the bill, and that is deeply disappointing and upsetting.”
A similar bill to legalize assisted dying failed to pass the House of Lords in 2014; but unlike Leadbeater’s draft bill, it had not yet been approved by MPs.
Leadbeater said he was “concerned” that the Lords were potentially trying to block a bill after the Commons had already “voted to change the law”.
Adding that “now is the time” to update the law, she said: “the Lords have to respect that, and we have to respect democracy”.
Legalizing assisted dying was not in the manifestos of any of the major parties before last year’s general election, and the parties agreed to treat it as a matter of conscience, meaning they will not tell MPs how to vote.
Critics and opponents of the bill have insisted the law needs to be significantly redesigned to ensure any system properly protects vulnerable people.
During the earlier debate, before Leadbeater’s intervention, former DUP leader Baron Dodds of Duncairn said further changes were needed to the bill to ensure “all necessary safeguards” were in place.
He added that the Lords would not have needed to spend so much time on the bill “if some of these issues had been dealt with differently by MPs”.
Former Supreme Court justice Elizabeth Butler-Sloss expressed a similar sentiment, telling colleagues: “Many of us don’t like the bill, but there is a real possibility that it will pass, and if it does, we want something better than it is now. The bottom line is, we’re not wasting any time.”
Ministers ruled out the possibility of the government using debate time to secure further discussion of the amendments in the House of Lords, but hinted they were prepared to explore other ways to free up more time.
According to Hansard SocietySuch options include additional sessions on Fridays to debate bills traditionally put forward by backbench MPs, the think tank said.
Other alternatives include using time normally allocated to other classes or sitting for longer hours between Monday and Thursday.
