Kevin Schofield
Updated Thu, October 24, 2024
A small demonstration by people advocating assisted dying hold a protest outside the Houses of Parliament last week. via Associated Press
MPs will vote on Labour MP Kim Leadbeater’s Assisted Dying Bill on November 29.
If passed by parliament, the legislation would make it legal to help a terminally ill person end their life.
Since it is a matter of conscience, MPs will be free to vote how they like rather than being whipped by party managers.
The last time the Commons voted on the issue was in 2015, when parliament comprehensively rejected the proposed law by 329 to 117.
However, given the fact that the make up of the Commons has changed so much since then, the result on November 29 is difficult to predict.
It is understood that Keir Starmer - who voted in favour of assisted dying nine years ago - plans to do so again next month.
But early indications are that his cabinet are evenly split on the issue.
Here’s what we know so far about the voting intentions of senior ministers and other MPs.
IN FAVOUR
The first cabinet minister to confirm they will vote for the bill was energy and net zero secretary Ed Miliband.
He said: “I will be voting for the assisted dying bill.
“These are very complex and difficult issues and there are very respectable views on both sides.
“For my part, I know there are people who are in the late stages of terminal illnesses, and I think the current situation is rather cruel actually.
“I think people having control over their own life and their own death is something that is the right thing to do.
“Obviously there have to be proper safeguards and I understand the concerns of some people on these issues, but my personal view will to be vote in favour of this Bill.”
Ed Miliband is voting for the bill. via Associated Press
Culture secretary Lisa Nandy also plans to vote for the bill, telling BBC Breakfast: “I’ve just seen too many examples of people who have no choices and no dignity at the end of their lives.
“And I think the current system is unsustainable.”
AGAINST
Justice secretary Shabana Mahmood - who as Lord Chancellor would have a key role in implementing the law were it to pass - has said she will be voting against it.
She told The Times: “As a Muslim, I have an unshakeable belief in the sanctity and value of human life.”
And earlier this year she said: “I know some MPs who support this issue think, ‘For God’s sake, we’re not a nation of granny killers, what’s wrong with you’… [But] once you cross that line, you’ve crossed it forever.
“If it becomes the norm that at a certain age or with certain diseases, you are now a bit of a burden… that’s a really dangerous position.”
Wes Streeting, the health secretary, also revealed that he has changed his position on the issue, having voted in favour of it in 2015.
He said: “The challenge is, I do not think palliative care, end-of-life care, in this country is good enough to give people a real choice.
“I worry about coercion and the risk that the right to die feels like a duty to die on the part of, particularly, older people.”
Health secretary Wes Streeting will vote against the bill. via Associated Press
Tory leadership candidate Robert Jenrick, who voted in favour of assisted dying in 2015, told the party’s annual conference that he would now vote against it.
Meanwhile James Cleverly, who was voted out of the race to succeed Rishi Sunak in the final MPs’ ballot, has also confirmed that he will vote against the bill, just as he did in 2015.
Streeting will vote against assisted dying law
Henry Zeffman - Chief Political Correspondent
and Jennifer McKiernan - Political reporter, BBC News
Thu, October 24, 2024
[EPA]
Health Secretary Wes Streeting will vote against changing the law on assisted dying, the BBC has confirmed.
Backbench Labour MP Kim Leadbeater has put forward a bill proposing that terminally ill adults nearing the end of their lives get the right to choose to shorten their deaths if they wish.
In a meeting of Labour MPs on Monday, Streeting said he did not believe the palliative care system was good enough to support assisted dying.
His cabinet colleague Lisa Nandy, however, has said she plans to vote for the bill when it comes before Parliament next month.
She told BBC Breakfast she said she had seen "too many examples of people who have no choices, and no dignity at the end of their lives".
MPs to get first vote on assisted dying for nine years
What is assisted dying and could the law change?
Assisted dying idea is dangerous, bishop warns
The culture secretary added: "I very much agree with Wes that we need to improve palliative care in this country, but I want people to have the choice about how they’re treated at the end of their life.”
The prime minister has made clear the government will remain neutral on the issue and Labour MPs will be given a free vote.
A similar move was rejected by MPs in 2015, but recent polling has consistently suggested a majority of the public supports a change in the law.
Sir Keir is personally in favour of a change, but cabinet ministers have been instructed not to campaign in public on either side of the issue ahead of a vote on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill on 29 November.
Dozens of Labour MPs are thought to be still undecided about the plans and Streeting's intervention, first reported by The Times, could be especially influential because of his position as the health secretary.
It is also notable because Streeting voted for the legalisation of assisted dying the last time the Commons voted, in 2015 – meaning he has changed his mind.
It is regarded as a conscience issue, which means that on all sides MPs will be given a “free vote” - and not instructed by their parties to vote a certain way.
Last month, he told the Financial Times he was “struggling” with the issue, saying he could “buy into the principle” of assisted dying but was “not sure as a country we have the right end-of-life care available to enable a real choice on assisted dying”.
He has also spoken of concerns about a "slippery slope" - which Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby has also warned of.
Streeting is the second cabinet minister in two days to state their intention to vote against changing the law, after Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood told The Times of her “unshakeable belief in the sanctity and the value of human life” on Tuesday.
The pair head the two government departments, health and justice, that would be tasked with implementing any new law.
Leadbeater has said patients with serious illnesses are suffering “horrible painful deaths” and that “people deserve a choice”.
The precise detail of her proposed legislation - setting out the circumstances which could lead someone to be eligible for assisted dying - is not expected to be published until closer to the Commons debate at the end of next month.
However, Leadbeater has indicated her bill would restrict assisted dying to terminally ill patients, and insisted there is "absolutely no question of disabled people or those with mental illness who are not terminally ill being pressured to end their lives".
Concerns about 'vulnerable'
She has said there must be both medical and judicial safeguarding, so that any intervention would require two doctors and a judge to sign it off, and that she would like to see a "timeframe" on the diagnosis of patients.
But opponents say there are still serious concerns about safeguards.
Earlier this month, Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson told the BBC she was worried about the impact on vulnerable and disabled people, as well as the possibility of coercive control and the ability of doctors to predict how long a patient has left to live.
The Archbishop met Leadbeater on Monday, but no details of their discussions were disclosed.
Assisted dying is generally used to describe a situation where someone who is terminally ill seeks medical help to obtain lethal drugs which they administer themselves.
Assisted suicide - intentionally helping another person to end their life - is currently banned in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, with a maximum prison sentence of 14 years.
The bill would cover England and Wales, where - like Northern Ireland - assisting someone to ending their life is against the law.
In Scotland - where it is not a specific criminal offence but can leave a person open to a murder charge - a bill is currently being considered that, if passed, would give terminally ill adults the right to request help to end their life.
Thu, October 24, 2024
[EPA]
Health Secretary Wes Streeting will vote against changing the law on assisted dying, the BBC has confirmed.
Backbench Labour MP Kim Leadbeater has put forward a bill proposing that terminally ill adults nearing the end of their lives get the right to choose to shorten their deaths if they wish.
In a meeting of Labour MPs on Monday, Streeting said he did not believe the palliative care system was good enough to support assisted dying.
His cabinet colleague Lisa Nandy, however, has said she plans to vote for the bill when it comes before Parliament next month.
She told BBC Breakfast she said she had seen "too many examples of people who have no choices, and no dignity at the end of their lives".
MPs to get first vote on assisted dying for nine years
What is assisted dying and could the law change?
Assisted dying idea is dangerous, bishop warns
The culture secretary added: "I very much agree with Wes that we need to improve palliative care in this country, but I want people to have the choice about how they’re treated at the end of their life.”
The prime minister has made clear the government will remain neutral on the issue and Labour MPs will be given a free vote.
A similar move was rejected by MPs in 2015, but recent polling has consistently suggested a majority of the public supports a change in the law.
Sir Keir is personally in favour of a change, but cabinet ministers have been instructed not to campaign in public on either side of the issue ahead of a vote on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill on 29 November.
Dozens of Labour MPs are thought to be still undecided about the plans and Streeting's intervention, first reported by The Times, could be especially influential because of his position as the health secretary.
It is also notable because Streeting voted for the legalisation of assisted dying the last time the Commons voted, in 2015 – meaning he has changed his mind.
It is regarded as a conscience issue, which means that on all sides MPs will be given a “free vote” - and not instructed by their parties to vote a certain way.
Last month, he told the Financial Times he was “struggling” with the issue, saying he could “buy into the principle” of assisted dying but was “not sure as a country we have the right end-of-life care available to enable a real choice on assisted dying”.
He has also spoken of concerns about a "slippery slope" - which Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby has also warned of.
Streeting is the second cabinet minister in two days to state their intention to vote against changing the law, after Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood told The Times of her “unshakeable belief in the sanctity and the value of human life” on Tuesday.
The pair head the two government departments, health and justice, that would be tasked with implementing any new law.
Leadbeater has said patients with serious illnesses are suffering “horrible painful deaths” and that “people deserve a choice”.
The precise detail of her proposed legislation - setting out the circumstances which could lead someone to be eligible for assisted dying - is not expected to be published until closer to the Commons debate at the end of next month.
However, Leadbeater has indicated her bill would restrict assisted dying to terminally ill patients, and insisted there is "absolutely no question of disabled people or those with mental illness who are not terminally ill being pressured to end their lives".
Concerns about 'vulnerable'
She has said there must be both medical and judicial safeguarding, so that any intervention would require two doctors and a judge to sign it off, and that she would like to see a "timeframe" on the diagnosis of patients.
But opponents say there are still serious concerns about safeguards.
Earlier this month, Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson told the BBC she was worried about the impact on vulnerable and disabled people, as well as the possibility of coercive control and the ability of doctors to predict how long a patient has left to live.
The Archbishop met Leadbeater on Monday, but no details of their discussions were disclosed.
Assisted dying is generally used to describe a situation where someone who is terminally ill seeks medical help to obtain lethal drugs which they administer themselves.
Assisted suicide - intentionally helping another person to end their life - is currently banned in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, with a maximum prison sentence of 14 years.
The bill would cover England and Wales, where - like Northern Ireland - assisting someone to ending their life is against the law.
In Scotland - where it is not a specific criminal offence but can leave a person open to a murder charge - a bill is currently being considered that, if passed, would give terminally ill adults the right to request help to end their life.
Let citizens’ assemblies break the political deadlock on issues like assisted dying
The Guardian
Wed, October 23, 2024
‘The government should give the assisted dying bill the time it will need to be debated properly – and build in space for a citizens’ assembly as part of the process.’Photograph: Lucy North/PA
As chief executive of Involve, I welcome John Harris’s call for a citizens’ assembly on assisted dying to inform Kim Leadbeater’s private member’s bill on the topic (How can Britain plot its future when it is so deeply stuck in the mud? Empower the citizens, 20 October). There is a valuable precedent in Jersey that the new government could learn from. In 2021, Involve helped run a citizens’ jury on this issue for the government of Jersey, as part of its preparations for legislation. Politicians later followed the recommendations of the jury, which were to allow assisted dying, for people with a terminal illness, in certain circumstances.
The lesson here is not whether the Jersey jury voted to allow or prevent assisted dying. Rather, the example shows that we should give our decision-makers the tools they need to do their jobs properly and democratically. In Jersey, politicians understood the informed preference of the people, when given space and time to come to judgment. This enabled decision-makers to break the political deadlock on this complex, sensitive and contested issue.
I urge the new government to provide Kim Leadbeater with a similar resource. Typically, private members’ bills are given very little legislative time. For an issue of such significance, the government should give the bill the extra time it will need to be debated properly – and build in space and time for a citizens’ assembly as part of the process.
Sarah Castell
CEO, Involve
• While I entirely agree with John Harris’s call for citizens’ assemblies to decide difficult issues, I was disappointed by his side swipe at the Church of England. The presence of the bishops in the House of Lords is no more anomalous than the rest of that house, and I am sure they will speak and vote with their consciences, and demonstrate the same sort of split on the matter as their “shrunken flock” – which is actually much larger than their weekly attendance and includes those who rarely come to church, but still look to the church for some guidance on these matters.
The debates inside church are largely the same as those engaged in more widely, balancing the right to determine when your own life has become unbearable, and the vulnerability of those who might be “encouraged” to seek an early exit. In church, we have this debate within the framework of a belief in the sanctity of life, but differ on whether that sanctity is maintained or abused by requiring people to hold on to life to a bitter end. So, bring on the citizens’ assemblies. I trust that Anglicans won’t be excluded from participating.
Rev Nick Ross
Holy Trinity Church, Smethwick
• If I understand John Harris correctly, he suggests that 99 ordinary citizens are better able to make decisions about complex long-term issues than 650 MPs. Given that most challenges now fall into this category, the logical conclusion is to close down parliament and establish citizens’ assemblies to determine the direction of the country.
This makes sense given the moronic nature of an MP’s life at the national level, which denies them the opportunity to speak their mind or vote based on the merit of arguments, their own views, and those of their constituents. This is further exacerbated by a system that incentivises governments to think about short-term political cycles. Prioritising the issues for citizens’ assemblies can be undertaken by those who know best – the people of the country. I’m sure an app could be developed to manage that.
Bill Kingdom
Oxford
• Do you have a photograph you’d like to share with Guardian readers? If so, please click here to upload it. A selection will be published in our Readers’ best photographs galleries and in the print edition on Saturdays.
The Guardian
Wed, October 23, 2024
‘The government should give the assisted dying bill the time it will need to be debated properly – and build in space for a citizens’ assembly as part of the process.’Photograph: Lucy North/PA
As chief executive of Involve, I welcome John Harris’s call for a citizens’ assembly on assisted dying to inform Kim Leadbeater’s private member’s bill on the topic (How can Britain plot its future when it is so deeply stuck in the mud? Empower the citizens, 20 October). There is a valuable precedent in Jersey that the new government could learn from. In 2021, Involve helped run a citizens’ jury on this issue for the government of Jersey, as part of its preparations for legislation. Politicians later followed the recommendations of the jury, which were to allow assisted dying, for people with a terminal illness, in certain circumstances.
The lesson here is not whether the Jersey jury voted to allow or prevent assisted dying. Rather, the example shows that we should give our decision-makers the tools they need to do their jobs properly and democratically. In Jersey, politicians understood the informed preference of the people, when given space and time to come to judgment. This enabled decision-makers to break the political deadlock on this complex, sensitive and contested issue.
I urge the new government to provide Kim Leadbeater with a similar resource. Typically, private members’ bills are given very little legislative time. For an issue of such significance, the government should give the bill the extra time it will need to be debated properly – and build in space and time for a citizens’ assembly as part of the process.
Sarah Castell
CEO, Involve
• While I entirely agree with John Harris’s call for citizens’ assemblies to decide difficult issues, I was disappointed by his side swipe at the Church of England. The presence of the bishops in the House of Lords is no more anomalous than the rest of that house, and I am sure they will speak and vote with their consciences, and demonstrate the same sort of split on the matter as their “shrunken flock” – which is actually much larger than their weekly attendance and includes those who rarely come to church, but still look to the church for some guidance on these matters.
The debates inside church are largely the same as those engaged in more widely, balancing the right to determine when your own life has become unbearable, and the vulnerability of those who might be “encouraged” to seek an early exit. In church, we have this debate within the framework of a belief in the sanctity of life, but differ on whether that sanctity is maintained or abused by requiring people to hold on to life to a bitter end. So, bring on the citizens’ assemblies. I trust that Anglicans won’t be excluded from participating.
Rev Nick Ross
Holy Trinity Church, Smethwick
• If I understand John Harris correctly, he suggests that 99 ordinary citizens are better able to make decisions about complex long-term issues than 650 MPs. Given that most challenges now fall into this category, the logical conclusion is to close down parliament and establish citizens’ assemblies to determine the direction of the country.
This makes sense given the moronic nature of an MP’s life at the national level, which denies them the opportunity to speak their mind or vote based on the merit of arguments, their own views, and those of their constituents. This is further exacerbated by a system that incentivises governments to think about short-term political cycles. Prioritising the issues for citizens’ assemblies can be undertaken by those who know best – the people of the country. I’m sure an app could be developed to manage that.
Bill Kingdom
Oxford
• Do you have a photograph you’d like to share with Guardian readers? If so, please click here to upload it. A selection will be published in our Readers’ best photographs galleries and in the print edition on Saturdays.
No comments:
Post a Comment