Peers back calls for more time to debate assisted dying bill
Peers have backed calls for extra time for the House of Lords to debate the assisted dying bill.
The proposal has been put forward by supporters increasingly concerned that it may run out of time to pass all parliamentary stages.
But some opponents argued that the bill was unsafe and suggested that spending more time to debate the bill would not transform it.
To become law, the legislation approved by MPs must also pass the House of Lords before early May, when the current Parliament session is expected to end.
There will now be private discussions between peers about when and how much extra time should be given.
Extending debates scheduled for Fridays is a possible option, but sitting later would anger some of his Jewish peers because the weekly religious Sabbath observance begins at sunset.
Peers have been given an extra 10 sessions to debate the legislation, but with more than 1,000 proposed amendments there is a risk it may not pass all parliamentary stages in time.
Supporters of assisted dying have expressed concern that the number of amendments put forward – which experts believe is a record number for a bill proposed by a backbench MP – is a delaying tactic aimed at preventing the bill from becoming law.
Opponents insist they are not blocking the bill but believe significant changes are needed to make it safe and protect vulnerable people.
The legislation proposes that terminally ill adults with less than six months to live in England and Wales should be allowed to apply for assisted dying, subject to certain safeguards.
Lord Falconer, who led the bill through the upper house, put forward the proposal for extra time to allow his colleagues to consider it.
Speaking during a debate on the motion, which passed without a vote, he warned that it would “significantly damage the reputation” of the House of Lords if his colleagues failed to reach a conclusion.
Former Lord Justice Baroness Butler-Sloss also warned that the reputation of the House of Representatives was ‘at stake’
He backed the proposals for more time, telling colleagues: “I don’t like the bill, but we’ve got it and we’ve got to deal with it.”
But his Conservative peer Lord Shinkwin, who has the rare brittle bone disease osteogenesis imperfecta, argued that his peers were already “generously giving of our time”.
“We can only work with what we are given, the volume of changes and the time spent evaluating them, so we reflect on the quality, or lack thereof, of the bill that is sent to us,” he said.
“If any bill is this ill-prepared and this insecure, the question is of course less whether the bill deserves more time than whether more time could transform it.”
A source close to colleagues concerned about the bill said: “Assisted dying supporters appear determined to continue complaining about the process in the Lords rather than deal with the significant failings in the bill.”
They added that the motion was not accompanied by “any acknowledgment of the extent of the problems identified by the Lord’s committees and external experts or what changes Lord Falconer is willing to accept to resolve them”.
Lord Kennedy, the government’s chief officer in the House of Lords, said he would seek to hold “urgent discussions” early next week “to find a way of delivering what the House has just agreed”.
