Thursday, October 17, 2024

‘A triumph’: London’s £19bn Elizabeth line is named best new architecture in Britain

Oliver Wainwright
THE GUARDIAN
Wed 16 October 2024 

‘As if the entire line has been moulded from a single substance’ … the Elizabeth line.Photograph: Hufton + Crow


With the longest platforms, the biggest tunnels and the fastest trains on the entire London underground, the Elizabeth line boasts a dizzying list of superlatives, carrying more people a day than any other train line in the country. It is now deemed to have the best design, too – being named as the winner of the 2024 RIBA Stirling prize for the finest architecture in the UK. The competition was stiff: from the National Portrait Gallery in London to the renovation of the Park Hill estate in Sheffield, from a Dorset dairy farm conversion to a street of social housing in Hackney and the 67-acre regeneration of King’s Cross.

The Lizzie line is a worthy winner, providing a dazzling demonstration that, for all chaos surrounding HS2, Britain is still capable of pulling off gargantuan transport infrastructure projects with style and panache. Stepping off the escalators and entering its streamlined white tunnels is like being teleported to a parallel universe, worlds away from the rest of the creaking, sooty tube network.

From the airy, clutter-free concourses to the soft acoustic, calm lighting and clear signage, every detail has been honed to make the passenger experience as simple and stress-free as possible. It is a model of standardisation and prefabrication, built with rare precision, its effortless elegance belying the fiendish complexity of coordinating the 73-mile-long endeavour, and the transformative effect it has had on the lives of millions.


“The Elizabeth line is a triumph in architect-led collaboration, offering a flawless, efficient, beautifully choreographed solution to inner-city transport,” said RIBA president Muyiwa Oki, chair of the Stirling prize jury. “It rewrites the rules of accessible public transport and sets a bold new standard for civic infrastructure, opening up the network, and by extension London, to everyone.”

The prize has been awarded to the “line-wide” design of the stations below ground level, led by Grimshaw Architects, with engineering by AtkinsRéalis, way-finding by Maynard and lighting by Equation. Different architects were responsible for each station above ground, with more mixed results. Unusually for the architecture-centric award, the other consultants have been named as equal co-designers, reflecting the collaborative nature of the £18.6bn endeavour, which led to a truly integrated result.

While other tube stations are cluttered with signs and light fittings added haphazardly over the years, the Elizabeth line has condensed and rationalised everything into a unified whole. Service “totems” on the concourses – inspired by the uplighter columns of Charles Holden’s 1930s tube stations – integrate everything from lighting and cameras to signage and speakers, as do seamless panels above the platform edge screens, all easily accessible for maintenance.

Corralling together all the gubbins means that the full volume of the tunnels can be expressed, with no need for suspended ceilings and walls to hide the services. The result feels extraordinarily spacious, with broad concourses that melt into wide cross-passages, all clad with sinuous white panels, as if the entire line has been moulded from a single substance.

The fluid geometry helps to minimise blind spots and improve people flow, and it also reflects how the tunnels were made. Rather than using iron or concrete retaining rings, which form right-angled corners as seen elsewhere on the underground, concrete was sprayed directly on to the exposed earth after excavation, creating softer tunnel intersections. This smooth, tubular world is lined with a continuous skin of white glass fibre-reinforced concrete panels, whose design was honed to reduce the number of panel types from 80 to just nine, saving costs and material – the carbon payback time should be about 10 years.

Full-size concourse mock-ups, built in a warehouse in Leighton Buzzard, allowed the design team to perfect every detail, and enabled the contractors to see what they were expected to do, and refine their own prototypes. It paid off: the result has the precise quality of a factory-made product more than a building.

There are clever details throughout, which few will notice on their commute. The lighting temperature shifts subtly, from warmer diffused light on the platforms and concourses, to a cooler tone in the “faster” cross-passages, to encourage people to keep moving. Above head height, the concrete panels are perforated, with acoustic matting hidden behind to absorb noise. This adds to the sense of calm, and helps make the line accessible to those who find tube travel stressful or intimidating, along with step-free access throughout.

For all the ingenuity on show, it’s not perfect. The focus on line-wide consistency underground, and diverse “contextual” design at street level, seems back to front. It would make more sense for the stations to be consistent and easily recognisable on the street – like the gleaming oxblood red tiles and arched windows of Leslie Green’s iconic Edwardian tube stations – and then different at platform level, so you can easily spot where you are from a crowded carriage. The Lizzie line’s efficient blur of beige could do with a few more splashes of character, like Eduardo Paolozzi’s mosaics at Tottenham Court Road, or Annabel Grey’s enamel panels at Marble Arch, or the slanting indigo tiled columns of Will Alsop’s North Greenwich. Instead, public art is confined to a few bolt-on baubles above ground.

Similarly, the marvel of these cavernous underground cathedrals soon fades away when you leave central London, as the line makes its way to the outer reaches of the capital above ground. An immense amount of design intelligence was lavished on the central stations, but the peripheral stops feel distinctly second class. They may sport the same regal purple roundels, but the banal boxes of Ilford and Ealing Broadway have little in the way of award-winning architecture. Was it too much to hope that the line’s Stirling prize quality could extend beyond Zone 2?


Elizabeth Line wins prestigious RIBA Stirling Award for architecture

Robert Dex and Arts Correspondent
EVENING STANDARD
Wed 16 October 2024 


Elizabeth Line wins prestigious RIBA Stirling Award for architecture


The Elizabeth Line has won the prestigious Stirling Prize for Architecture.

The transport system was hailed as “a flawless, efficient, beautifully choreographed solution to inner-city transport” by the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) judges.

It saw off competition from projects including the multi-million pound renovation of the National Portrait Gallery and the masterplan transforming the area around King’s Cross Station.

The rail line, which crosses central London connecting Reading and Heathrow to Essex, was designed by Grimshaw, Maynard, Equation and AtkinsRéalis and fetaures wide open platforms and steep escalators to carry its commuters.

The Elizabeth Line has been praised for its style (Hufton + Crow)

It is used by around 700,000 passengers every weekday who travel across 62 miles of track and through 26 miles of tunnels.

The excavation project which ensured it avoided already existing sewage systems and tube lines uncovered archealogical treasures including the remains of a 55-milllion-year-old wooly mammoth as well as seeing six million tonnes of earth removed to make room for the network which was then used tobuild a new nature reserve in Essex.

It was officially opened by the Queen in May 2022 but this is the first year it has been eligible to be considered for the prize.



Queen Elizabeth at the opening of the Elizabeth Line (AFP)

RIBA President Muyiwa Oki, who chaired the jury, said: “The Elizabeth Line is a triumph in architect-led collaboration, offering a flawless, efficient, beautifully choreographed solution to inner-city transport.

“It’s an uncluttered canvas that incorporates a slick suite of architectural components to create a consistent, line-wide identity – through which thousands of daily passengers navigate with ease.

“Descending into the colossal network of tunnels feels like entering a portal to the future, where the typical commuter chaos is transformed into an effortless experience.

“This is architecture of the digital age – a vast scheme that utilises cutting-edge technology to create distinctive spatial characteristics and experiences .

“It rewrites the rules of accessible public transport, and sets a bold new standard for civic infrastructure, opening up the network and by extension, London, to everyone.”

UK

Office worker wins compensations after boss refused to say hello to her three times


Brooke Davies
Published Oct 16, 2024,
METRO UK

Andrew Gilchrist deliberately ignored one of his employees
 (Picture: LinkedIn/Google)

An office worker is set to receive compensation after her boss refused to say hello to her.

Nadine Hanson, a recruitment manager, greeted her new boss Andrew Gilchrist three times when she arrived for work but he deliberately ignored her every time, an employment tribunal heard.

Mr Gilchrist, 62, was angry at Ms Hanson because he thought she was late but he had no idea she had been at a medical appointment.

He then gave two colleagues a pay rise without telling her within just an hour of confronting her at their office in Scunthorpe.


His behaviour led to Ms Hanson winning her claim, with Employment Judge Sarah Davies concluding his behaviour was ‘unreasonable’.

She said: ‘That is conduct, from the owner and Director of the new employer, that is calculated or likely to undermine trust and confidence.

‘While it might not, by itself, be a fundamental breach of contract, it was capable of contributing to such a breach.’

Mr Gilchrist, who had just taken over the business, was ‘deliberately undermining’ regional operations manager Ms Hanson to try to force her to leave, it was heard.

Mr Gilchrist claimed at the tribunal that he ‘could not remember’ whether he said hello because it was so busy (Picture: LinkedIn)

He pushed her phone out of the way when she tried to explain she had an appointment, suggested that she ‘leave’, and went behind her back by giving two staff members pay rises without informing her.

Ms Hanson, who eventually quit and suffered from anxiety due to how she was treated by Mr Gilchrist, has now successfully sued his company for unfair dismissal.

She also won a claim of unauthorised deduction from wages after Mr Gilchrist withheld her sick pay because he thought she was faking being unwell.

Ms Hanson is now in line to receive compensation from Interaction Recruitment Ltd, which has 30 offices across the UK.

The tribunal heard Ms Hanson was Northern Regional Operations Manager in Scunthorpe, Lincs, working for another recruitment company.

In September 2023 Interaction Recruitment acquired the company and managing director Mr Gilchrist travelled to the Scunthorpe office to meet Ms Hanson and two other staff members that worked under her.

The tribunal, in Leeds, found that after a ‘get to know you’ meeting of less than an hour, Mr Gilchrist formed a ‘snap judgement’ of Ms Hanson that she was not pulling her weight, despite it being unwarranted.

A tribunal report said: ‘It is equally clear that Mr Gilchrist quickly formed the impression that [Ms Hanson] “did very little work and left her two colleagues to do the work” and that he was “not happy”.

‘This was apparently on the basis of a “get to know you” team meeting lasting less than an hour with everyone present, and without any proper information about what [she]did or proper discussion with her about that.’

Days later, he made an unannounced visit to the Scunthorpe office.

‘[Ms Hanson] arrived late that day, because she had a medical appointment. It was a busy day because they had arranged for a number of candidates to come in and be interviewed. There were about eight candidates filling in forms when she arrived.

‘Ms Hanson’s evidence is that she said good morning to Mr Gilchrist three times, but he ignored her.

‘They went into the meeting room. She attempted to show him her phone with evidence of her medical appointment, but he pushed it to one side.

‘He said, “I suggest if you don’t want to be here that you leave”. She replied, “After 20 years of working for the company, the only way I will be leaving is if you make me redundant”.

‘The meeting became quite heated. She tried to tell Mr Gilchrist about how she performed her role.’

Mr Gilchrist claimed at the tribunal that he ‘could not remember’ whether he said hello because it was so busy, but said he thinks he said ‘hello to everyone’.


The tribunal found his evidence to be ‘wholly unconvincing’.

The tribunal heard within an hour of the incident with Ms Hanson, he sent an email to her two direct reports, giving them a pay rise.

Ms Hanson was ‘humiliated’ because she was not informed.

In October 2023, Ms Hanson handed in her eight-week notice, saying she had been ‘made to feel undervalued’ and that it left her ‘feeling undermined and causing her sleepless nights, upset and anxiety’.

She was signed off with anxiety during her notice period – but the tribunal heard Mr Gilchrist refused to pay her sick pay because he didn’t believe her.

Ms Hanson won claims of unfair dismissal and unauthorised deduction from wages.

Concluding, Employment Judge Sarah Davies said it was ‘implausible’ that Mr Gilchrist didn’t hear Ms Hanson’s greeting and that he ‘deliberately’ ignored her.

Judge Davies said: ‘I find that there was no reasonable or proper cause for deliberately ignoring [her] when she arrived at work, despite her greeting him three times.

‘That is conduct, from the owner and Director of the new employer, that is calculated or likely to undermine trust and confidence. While it might not, by itself, be a fundamental breach of contract, it was capable of contributing to such a breach.
More Trending
‘When she told him that the only way she was going was if she was made redundant, he determined that she had no future with the business.

‘That is why he offered pay rises to her staff members within an hour and without discussing it with her.

‘The situation was not that urgent… He simply did not want [Ms Hanson] there anymore.’

Compensation will be determined at a later date.
Charles III will be the first King of Australia to visit its shores. He could also be the last

By Jess Carniel - The Conversation
16 Oct, 2024 

Then-Prince Charles and Princess Diana stand in front of Uluru during their 1983 tour of Australia. Photo / Getty Images

The King and Queen are set to tour Australia and Samoa later this month in Charles’ first visit to both countries since his coronation.

King Charles III and Queen Camilla’s upcoming visit to Australia is significant for several reasons. It is Charles’ first visit since ascending to the throne – as well as the first time a British male head of state has visited Australia.

Some observers are also wondering whether it might be one of the last royal tours, as debates about Australia potentially becoming a republic are reignited.

As the monarchy tries to “modernise” alongside growing support for republicanism, this visit will be one to watch.

As Prince of Wales, Charles had a long and successful track record of royal tours to Australia, having visited 16 times. The visits included a term attending Geelong Grammar School in 1966, as well as the 1983 tour with Princess Diana that saw Australians caught up in Di-mania – and Charles reportedly gripped by jealousy.

But Charles’ royal predecessors weren’t as lucky in their trips down under. His own grandfather, King George VI, planned to visit Australia in the late 1940s with Queen Elizabeth and Princess Margaret, but the tour was postponed due to his poor health. While he had previously visited as the Duke of York, George VI never made it here as King.
King George VI was born in 1895 and reigned from 1936 until his death in 1952. Photo / Getty Images

The very first royal visit to Australia – Prince Alfred’s 1867 tour – had all appearance of being cursed. One of his crew members drowned during the first stop in South Australia. Several more people died in a major fire accident and a Catholic-Protestant skirmish in Melbourne.

Most memorably – certainly for Alfred – was an assassination attempt on the prince in Sydney. This, interestingly, is an experience King Charles has also had.

During Charles’ 1994 visit, student protester David Kang fired blanks from a starter pistol in protest of Australia’s treatment of Cambodian refugees. The then Prince of Wales wasn’t harmed and Kang went on to become a barrister.

For non-British royals, however, Sydney has been a lucky location. Danish King Frederick X’s decidedly modern romance with Tasmania-born Queen Mary famously began when they met at a bar during the Sydney Olympics in 2000.
Prince or King – does it matter?

This will be Charles’ 17th visit to Australia, but his first as reigning monarch. This means he is visiting not on behalf of the Head of State, but as the Head of State.

The royal couple’s planned Australian engagements are as strategic as they are symbolic. They reflect carefully curated and ostensibly “non-political” issues such as environmental sustainability, cancer research and family violence.

The visit also includes a meeting with Indigenous representatives. Notably, it is the first royal tour to not use the term “walkabout” to describe public meet-and-greets, as this term had been criticised as cultural appropriation.

It seems Charles’ modernised monarchy is seeking to distance itself from overtly colonial language – as much as a foreign monarchy can, anyway. The King has yet to respond to Indigenous leaders calling for an apology for British colonisers’ genocides of First Nations peoples.
The main purpose of the visit is for King Charles to attend the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Samoa. Photo / Getty Images

Although the Australian media has focused on the stops in Canberra and Sydney, the main purpose of the tour is for the King to attend the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Samoa between October 21 and 26.

It is the first time the meeting will be hosted by a Pacific Island state. The talks are an important opportunity for the King to highlight issues such as climate change, to which small island states in the Pacific are particularly vulnerable.
Are people happy about the visit?

All six state premiers have declined their invitations to meet the King at his welcome reception in Canberra, citing other commitments. Their excuses might be genuine in some cases. For example, Queensland Premier Steven Miles is in the last few weeks of an election campaign.

However, critics from the monarchist camp have viewed the move as a political response to debates over whether Australia should remain a constitutional monarchy with the King as its head of state.


A YouGov Australia poll published on the first anniversary of Charles’ ascension showed Australians are divided on republicanism. While 32% want to become a republic “as soon as possible”, 35% preferred to remain a constitutional monarchy and 12% wanted to become a republic after the King’s death. The remaining respondents didn’t know.

Notably, the poll found republican sentiment had increased since Queen Elizabeth II’s death in September 2022.

The Albanese government established an assistant minister for the republic upon entering office in 2022 (although the portfolio was abolished with this year’s reshuffle). Upon taking the role, assistant minister Matt Thistlethwaite suggested the “twilight of [Queen Elizabeth’s] reign” presented “a good opportunity for a serious discussion about what comes next for Australia”.
Republican sentiment in Australia has increased since Queen Elizabeth II’s death. Photo / Getty Images

Charles doesn’t seem to be taking all this too personally. In a letter responding to the Australian Republican Movement in March this year, his private secretary said the King viewed this as “a matter for the Australian public to decide”.

The royal tour and the meeting in Samoa will be important opportunities for the monarchy to connect with Australia and other Commonwealth nations.

By presenting itself as a modern institution engaged with contemporary issues such as climate change, the monarchy will also have to engage with the possibility of new political identities for its former colonies.


Jess Carniel is an Associate Professor in Humanities at University of Southern Queensland.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.







UK
Assisted dying bill enters parliament – how likely is it to become law?

Daniel Gover, Senior Lecturer in British Politics, Queen Mary University of London
Wed 16 October 2024

Labour backbench MP Kim Leadbeater has introduced a bill in the House of Commons that aims to legalise assisted dying in England and Wales.

Leadbeater is not a member of the government, but has been able to introduce the terminally ill adults (end of life) bill after topping this session’s private members’ bill ballot in September.

It’s almost a decade since MPs last voted on assisted dying. Back then, the Conservatives had a majority. Now, the tables have turned and Labour has a large majority. However, it’s not yet clear whether the current cohort of MPs would back this momentous change.

Want more politics coverage from academic experts? Every week, we bring you informed analysis of developments in government and fact check the claims being made.

Sign up for our weekly politics newsletter, delivered every Friday.

Leadbeater’s bill faces additional procedural challenges. Private members’ bills – legislation sponsored by individual MPs rather than the government – face a precarious route onto the statute book. They are highly vulnerable to objections, even if only from a small number of MPs.

While private members’ bills go through the same basic process to become law as government-sponsored legislation, they are awarded only limited parliamentary time. There are only 13 Fridays per session (typically a year) when these bills are discussed in the House of Commons.

A House of Commons staffer draws lots in the private members’ bill ballot in September. UK Parliament/Flickr, CC BY-NC-ND


Challenge 1: second reading

The first major test for this bill will be its second reading stage, due on November 29. For backbench bills, and especially those that are contentious, this stage can be tricky.

Private members’ bills aren’t “programmed” like government bills, which means there is no mechanism for allocating more time to their discussion if needed. So, it only takes a small numbers of MPs to frustrate a bill’s progress by talking at length to run down the clock.

To prevent this, supporters can attempt to move the “closure” – a motion to end the debate and make a decision. This, however, requires at least 100 MPs to vote in support – a difficult feat on Fridays, when most MPs are in their constituencies. This problem was illustrated earlier this year on a bill to outlaw conversion therapy. However, on a bill of this profile, there is a good chance of passing the closure.

For Leadbeater’s bill, simply getting a vote at this stage would be an important accomplishment. It would mean that for the first time since 2015 – also on a backbench bill – the opinion of the Commons could be tested on assisted dying.


Challenge 2: public evidence?

Assuming the assisted dying bill passes the second reading stage, it would then be sent to a public bill committee for detailed consideration.


Some major social changes have come about over the years because of backbench bills. Flickr/UK Parliament, CC BY-NC-ND

Unlike for government bills, this committee cannot, by default, hold public evidence sessions on backbench bills. For a reform of this significance, though, we should expect pressure from some MPs for an exception to be made to allow outside bodies – such as campaign groups, religious organisations and medical professionals – to submit evidence. This would delay the bill’s passage a little, though this need not be lengthy.

Challenge 3: report stage

The bill’s biggest test is likely to be at report stage – most likely on April 25 next year. This is when the bill returns to the House of Commons chamber.

Conventional wisdom is that this stage is often fatal for contentious backbench bills, since opponents can propose large numbers of amendments to the legislation, requiring many separate decisions to be made and time to be drained. Even if supporters attempt to move the closure, with enough amendments they may still run out of time. Something like this nearly happened on an EU referendum bill in 2013.

Yet, this conventional wisdom may be outdated. The speaker of the house routinely groups report-stage amendments together, reducing the number of separate decisions – and in recent years the norm has been a single group. Since 2019, there has never been more than one group of amendments up for consideration on any private member’s bill. If the speaker follows this recent practice, it may be easier to get the bill through report stage.

Challenge 4: out of time?

It is quite possible the assisted dying bill could overcome all these procedural hurdles. But if not, ministers may need to step in to set aside some of the government’s own parliamentary time to discuss the bill further.

Government time for backbench bills has been rare in recent years, although it did occur in 2019 during the passage of a bill to strengthen the laws around female genital mutilation. But there are some striking historical precedents.

In the 1960s, private members’ bills were used to pass major social reforms on the laws around homosexuality and abortion, and to abolish the death penalty. In all three cases, the government stepped in to dedicate extra time in the face of attempts to slow these bills’ progress.

Challenge 5: up to the Lords

If the bill makes it past these stages, then it also has a good chance of completing its final House of Commons (third reading) stage. But it would then need to complete a similar process in the House of Lords. While there are not quite the same time pressures in this chamber – notably, it does not have the same system of 13 Fridays – there is also no programming for any bills.

It is hard to predict exactly how the Lords would respond to an assisted dying bill. There have been multiple previous attempts to legislate on this matter over the years. The last time one reached committee stage, in 2015, it got bogged down with amendments and made it no further.

Leadbeater’s bill will be helped by another bill on assisted dying, started in the House of Lords by Labour peer Charlie Falconer. This is scheduled for debate in the coming months and may help identify and resolve some of the detailed points of contention – though this is not guaranteed.

It would be unusual, though not impossible, for the Lords to fail to pass a private member’s bill agreed by the House of Commons. Since 2010, there appear to have been only two that were actively held up in the Lords – as opposed to just running out of time. Even so, a small number of determined opponents to assisted dying could make life difficult.

Were this to happen – at this point an extreme hypothetical – one option available to MPs would be to re-introduce the bill in the subsequent session, perhaps from the new crop of ballot bills. Under the provisions of the Parliament Act(s), this bill might then be eligible to become law without the assent of the Lords. Such a situation very nearly occurred this year on another backbench bill, on hunting trophies, though the timing of the general election intervened.

Despite these procedural hurdles, the assisted dying bill has a reasonably good chance of passing into law. In the end, much will depend on whether MPs are willing to back this change, and how determined they are to do so.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.



Vulnerable people not at risk from proposed assisted dying law, says MP

Robert Booth Social affairs correspondent
Wed 16 October 2024 

Kim Leadbeater said the law would only apply to ‘people who are already dying’.
Photograph: Parliament TV


The lives of disabled and vulnerable people will not be at risk from a proposed assisted dying law because it will only apply to terminally ill adults, and each case is likely to be ruled on by two doctors and a judge, the MP sponsoring it has said.

Kim Leadbeater said her historic “choice at the end of life” bill will include “stringent” criteria and a cooling-off period in what is likely to be one of the most controversial pieces of legislation to go before parliament in years.

But people who are facing intolerable suffering but are not dying will still be denied medical assistance to end their lives, under the likely terms of the bill to be introduced on Wednesday.

That decision will prompt debate over whether the threshold for medical assistance to die should relate to suffering rather than time left to live.

Some campaigners argue people whose conditions mean they can be trapped and suffering in their bodies long before they meet a narrow definition of terminal illness will be left out.

A major poll has suggested most of the public support an assisted dying law in every constituency of Great Britain apart from Bradford West.

It found 74% agreed that adults “who are intolerably suffering from an incurable condition and who wish to end their lives” should be allowed medical help to do so. More than 7,000 adults were canvassed this month in an MRP poll by Electoral Calculus for Humanists UK, a campaign group that supports assisted dying.

A separate poll for King’s College London last week found 66% support for a bill becoming law restricted to people with six months or less to live, but about half of respondents said they would probably change their mind if it turned out someone had been put under pressure (55%) or ended their life because they were denied the care they needed (48%).

Opponents of the bill, which would become law in England and Wales only, are planning to protest outside parliament on Wednesday, where supporters will also rally. Gordon MacDonald, the chief executive of Care Not Killing, claimed the bill amounted to “state-sanctioned killing”.

“This bill sends a dog-whistle message to the terminally ill, vulnerable, elderly and disabled people, especially those on low or fixed incomes, that their lives are worth less than others,” he said on Tuesday.

But campaigners in favour of an assisted dying law welcomed the first reading of the bill as a “historic day”.

“This bill gives dying people hope that they will live the rest of their lives with the comfort of knowing they will have a say in how they die,” said Sarah Wootton, chief executive of Dignity in Dying.

The broadcaster Jonathan Dimbleby, who alongside Esther Rantzen is one of several high-profile backers of a law change, said: “My brother Nicholas was required to die from motor neurone disease and he wanted that right [to choose assisted dying] … he fervently wanted the choice … he would have welcomed the fact that this bill is going before the Commons.”

Dimbleby also accused “the leadership of some parts of the church” of “scaremongering” by warning of a “slippery slope” towards assisted dying for people who are not terminally ill. He called for the debate to be “measured and balanced and not overwhelmed by emotive assertions”.

Speaking to the Guardian, Leadbeater confirmed the bill will require adults to have a prognosis of being no more than a fixed number of months from death, with options including six, nine and 12 months all still under consideration.

“My concern about the conversation around people with disabilities is that issue … has been conflated with this piece of legislation, which is actually about people who are already dying – shortening their deaths because of terminal illness,” she said. “So I will be the loudest voice in the room shouting for the rights of people with disabilities.”

Concerns were expressed to a recent parliamentary inquiry into assisted dying that people living with a disability, and elderly people, may worry about being a burden on their family and may pursue assisted dying for that reason.

“I get a bit worried there’s a panic and potentially some scaremongering about people having to do this,” Leadbeater said.

“No one has to do anything. This is about finding a choice for people. The two other really important words that will be on the face of the bill tomorrow are ‘safeguards’ and ‘protections’.”

She insisted there would be “no slippery” slope towards wider interpretation of the bill. The Catholic church this week launched a letter-writing campaign targeting MPs and encouraging the faithful to oppose the bill, warning “a right to die can become a duty to die”.

Leadbeater added: “[The bill] will send a very clear message to people that this is not about disabled people. It’s not about people with mental health conditions. It is about terminally ill adults.”

The proposed law will be closer to those already in use in Oregon in the US, Australia and New Zealand than more widely drawn laws in Canada and the Netherlands where illness need not be terminal. In the Netherlands some children are included in a law that allows assisted dying where a doctor agrees suffering is “lasting and unbearable”.

Leadbeater will publish the detail of the bill in the coming weeks before a first Commons debate in late November.

“We need law that is robust and clear and by having really strict, stringent criteria, [we] will create a much better situation than we have currently got,” she said.

However, Dr Graham Winyard, a former medical director of NHS England, warned that the proposal would not end “death tourism” to Switzerland.

About 40 people travelled from the UK to Dignitas last year to end their lives and Winyard’s research found that less than half of UK residents who have obtained an assisted death in Switzerland in recent years would have been spared the journey by a law limited to terminal illness with a six-month prognosis.

Writing to the Guardian, he urged Leadbeater to “ensure that those who are incurably suffering – as well as the terminally ill – are provided with the comfort of choice. It is our strong belief that a bill which encompasses both the terminally ill and the incurably suffering would best reflect the values of compassion and dignity that we all strive for in end-of-life care.”


Assisted dying bill would have ‘clear criteria’, says MP in response to concerns

Aine Fox and Caitlin Doherty, PA
Wed 16 October 2024 


A potential assisted dying law for England and Wales would have “clear criteria, safeguards and protections”, the MP behind a new Bill has insisted in the face of concerns about a so-called “slippery slope” to take in people who are at risk of feeling pressured to end their lives.

Only those who are terminally ill would be eligible under the Bill, it has been confirmed, amid calls from some campaigners for those enduring unbearable suffering to come within the scope of a new law.

The formal short title of Labour MP Kim Leadbeater’s legislation for choice at the end of life is the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill.


Dignity in Dying campaigners gathered in Parliament Square in support of the new Bill (Lucy North/PA)

She will formally introduce her Bill in the House of Commons on Wednesday, and it is expected to be debated and face a first vote on November 29.

The detail of the proposed legislation is unlikely to be set out until closer to that debate, with Ms Leadbeater saying she is speaking to doctors and lawyers as well as campaigners on all sides to “make sure we get this right”.

Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby has warned of his concerns around introducing any form of legislation for assisted dying.

He told the BBC: “I think this approach is both dangerous and sets us in a direction which is even more dangerous, and in every other place where it’s been done, has led to a slippery slope.”


The Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby has warned of his concerns around legislation for assisted dying (Doug Peters/PA)

But Ms Leadbeater has rejected this argument.

She told ITV’s Good Morning Britain she would not have such concerns so long as “we get this legislation right”, adding: “That’s why the next six weeks and the debates that will come in the following months are really important.

“We’ve got the benefit in this country of looking at what other countries have done. And I’m very clear, based on what I’ve seen so far and the research that I’ve done is, if we get this right from the start, which some places have done, places like Oregon and certain states in Australia, we have very strict criteria, then those jurisdictions do not broaden out the criteria.

“So we have to get it right from the start with very clear criteria, safeguards and protections.

“And I’m not looking at the model that is going on in Canada. I’m looking at those other jurisdictions where this is done well and in some cases it’s been done for a long time, very well, and the criteria have never been extended.”

The Canadian model is open to people experiencing intolerable suffering caused by their medical condition, whereas in Oregon it is limited to those who are terminally ill.

The long title of the proposed legislation, which would apply to England and Wales, is a “Bill to allow adults who are terminally ill, subject to safeguards and protections, to request and be provided with assistance to end their own life”.

If the Bill clears its first hurdle at the end of November, it will face line-by-line examination in committee and further Commons votes before being sent to the Lords where the process begins again, meaning any change in the law would not be agreed until next year at the earliest.

Thanks to @kimleadbeater for joining us outside Parliament this morning.

Today Westminster takes a historic first step towards a more compassionate law.#AssistedDying #YesToDignity pic.twitter.com/qLMBJySV0D

— Dignity in Dying (@dignityindying) October 16, 2024

It is possible that MPs could vote against it on November 29, as they did last time changes to the law were considered in 2015, preventing it going any further.

Ms Leadbeater has indicated she would like to see a “time frame” on the diagnosis of patients, and she told BBC’s Newsnight there must be both medical and judicial safeguarding when it was put to her that the Bill could require two medical professionals and a judge to agree.

High-profile supporters of legalising assisted dying include Dame Esther Rantzen who is terminally ill and has pleaded with the public to write to their MPs to ask for “the right to choose, not to shorten our lives, but to shorten our deaths”.

MPs will have a free vote in Parliament, deciding according to their conscience rather than along party lines.

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has previously supported assisted dying and made a personal promise to Dame Esther to make time for a debate and vote on the issue.

Members of Distant Voices, Christian Concern, the Christian Medical Fellowship and SPUC gathered in Westminster to protest against the proposed legislation (Lucy North/PA)

Trevor Moore, chairman of campaign group My Death, My Decision, said he had hoped the new Bill would “represent the first step in a profound and compassionate shift in how we provide the dignity of choice for people who are intolerably suffering”.

Actor and disability campaigner Liz Carr, speaking before the Bill’s formal title was announced, said limiting the legislation to the terminally ill would not lessen her fears about its potential consequences for vulnerable people.

She told the PA news agency: “Neither (the Bill being limited to terminally ill or being wider) allay my fears, neither make me feel less worried.

“Because I know this is such a concerted campaign and such a push, and there are huge lobbyists nationally, internationally to change these laws that I just don’t feel reassured because they want what they want, and what they want is to legalise assisted suicide.”

Campaigners both for and against the proposed new law gathered outside Parliament on Wednesday.


Terminally ill people in England and Wales could soon have the right to choose to end their lives

Senior Political Correspondent 16 Oct 2024

The bill is being introduced by Labour MP Kim Ledbeater and she says there will be really strict limits on who would be eligible.

A judge and two doctors would have to agree that terminally ill patients can be helped to end their lives under a proposed new law that’s just been introduced in Parliament.

A separate bill is already under discussion in Scotland, and politicians in both Jersey and the Isle of Man have voted to approve plans that could allow assisted dying in future.

Jenny Carruthers was diagnosed with incurable breast cancer in 2020. She wants the right to die, and believes terminally ill people deserve a voice. Her partner died of liver cancer in 2013 and she saw firsthand what it’s like to die a painful death.

“Our law as it stands is unsafe; it doesn’t allow any choice.”

“The law as it stands means that either I’ve got to suffer that or I’ve got to break the law, wave goodbye to my children on the airport steps if I’ve got enough money to go to Switzerland… if they come with me they’d be open to prosecution.”

The bill is being introduced by Labour MP Kim Ledbeater and she says there will be really strict limits on who would be eligible.

She says only terminally ill people who have 6 to 12 months left to live, and are able to decide for themselves, will be eligible, which is similar to laws in 11 states of America.

This is different to assisted suicide which can involve people who are not terminally ill – assisted suicide is legal in Switzerland.

But there is fierce opposition to this bill from religious groups who believe in the sanctity of life, to disability campaigners who say it’s a slippery slope.

Miro Griffiths is an academic and disability rights activist who fears this bill will devalue lives like his.

“The communities that will be most affected by the bill are facing systemic injustices, they’re facing discrimination in terms of the places where they live, the resources and services they’re trying to access and the quality of life that they have currently. Those things will play into the choices people make about the value of their life.”

The law may start with assisted dying, they argue, but over time laws can change, and a few years from now this could evolve to assisted suicide.

The academic told Channel 4 News “there are many voices who want assisted dying who wouldn’t be eligible for the criteria that’s being proposed so what you’ll have is a continuation of campaigning and as we’ve seen in other countries the criteria then expands.”

The last time this came up in Parliament was in 2015, and MPs voted against, but the mood has moved on since then.

Opinion polls over recent years have regularly shown support in the UK for assisted dying, with as much as 60-75% in favour.

Crucially though the Prime Minister is making this a free vote so Labour MPs can vote with their conscience, not with their party.

For 6 weeks now MPs will fiercely debate this issue but it is one that all main parties are likely to be split on.



Canada must act now to be prepared for the next health emergency, new pandemic report warns

A future pandemic could be swifter and more severe than COVID-19, experts say in independent report

A woman in full PPE leans over a patient on a ventilator.
A nurse in full PPE leans over a COVID-19 patient on a ventilator in January 2022. A new report from an independent group of experts outlines how Canada can better prepare for future pandemics. (Evan Mitsui/CBC)

Canada needs to learn from the COVID-19 pandemic and take action before the next health emergency strikes, an expert panel of doctors and researchers say in a new independent report.

"Most scientists feel that it's only a matter of time before we face something similar to what we went through these past five years," said Dr. Fahad Razak, one of the six experts who contributed to the report examining how scientific advice was developed and how research was co-ordinated.

"A lot of what we saw globally when we compared [pandemic] responses suggests that the preparedness is the critical part."

The panel's report, called "The Time to Act is Now," says disease surveillance, hospitalization data and research findings need to be communicated much more effectively between the provinces, the territories and the federal government.

"The fragmented nature of how we govern this country, with separate decisions being made in provinces and territories and what's being done at the federal government [level], had really significant impact on how we responded to the pandemic," said Razak, an internal medicine specialist at St. Michael's Hospital in Toronto who was the scientific director of the Ontario COVID-19 Science Advisory Table.

WATCH | National inquiry into COVID failures needed, experts say:

Canada needs a national inquiry into COVID failures, experts say

1 year ago
Duration2:42
A series of new reports in the British Medical Journal say Canada was 'ill-prepared' and 'lacked co-ordination' in the COVID-19 pandemic. The report authors say it is time to investigate what happened and learn how to prepare for the next pandemic.

The availability of health data varied across the country during the pandemic, making it "very difficult for us to get a national picture of what was happening," he said in an interview on Tuesday. 

The report also says Canada needs to create a single, permanent scientific advisory group — something that's been done in the U.K. — instead of trying to pull together that expertise in the middle of an epidemic.

"There's only so much that you can do in the middle of a crisis. People are desperate, infrastructure does not work as well when there's a crisis," Razak said.

The report says the "absence of pre-existing emergency protocols for science advice in Canada caused significant delays" and better co-ordination was needed "within and across all levels of government."

Having scientific advisory groups federally and provincially communicating separately "resulted in multiple streams of advice," said the report, which was released by the agency on Thursday. It had been requested by Health Canada last August.

The report also recommended that evolving health information should be shared much more quickly with the public.

WATCH | Will Canadians get updated COVID vaccines this year? 

Updated COVID-19 vaccines roll out — but will Canadians roll up their sleeves?

12 days ago
Duration1:58
Updated COVID-19 vaccines are rolling out across the country, with priority access for people over 65 and those with underlying medical conditions, but convincing Canadians to roll up their sleeves yet again could be a challenge.

"I think the pandemic was a perfect example of if you don't publicly release that information, it breeds mistrust and disinformation," said Razak.

"[The scientific advisory group's] communication to government should be released to the public almost as quickly as you generate it," he said.

"You want the public to be confident that they are also being provided with the best available scientific evidence."

Report highlights role of inequities

The report says Canada also needs to address inequities among people who are hardest hit during emergencies, including people who are racialized, Indigenous people, people who are living in poverty, people experiencing homelessness and residents of long-term care homes.

"Greater focus and investment is needed to support transdisciplinary research to identify the best ways to implement public health and other interventions to tackle well-documented inequalities," it says.

That includes more funding for Indigenous-led research, the report says.

Dr. Shannon McDonald, another expert on the panel, said funding agencies should support different types of Indigenous-led studies, including research examining how factors such as colonization, experiences of trauma and economic situations affect underlying health that could in turn affect people's risk of being disproportionately affected by emergencies.

Better data sharing between governments and First Nations, Métis and Inuit communities is also important, said McDonald, who is Métis/Anishinaabe and the former chief medical officer at the First Nations Health Authority in B.C., in an interview on Wednesday.

That requires long-term partnerships, she said.

"When we start talking about meaningfully engaging [with] Indigenous peoples, it cannot be in the ad hoc way that the gazillion committees were formed when COVID was declared as a public health emergency globally," McDonald said.

"It really is about the relationship developing over time and supporting health data strategies and advancement."

A hand with a purple glove holding a jar of dirty water to the light against a blue sky
Some provinces, including Ontario, have made significant cuts to their wastewater surveillance programs. (Mac Lai/Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry)

Despite the shortcomings, Razak said there were many aspects of Canada's handling of the COVID-19 pandemic to be proud of, including using wastewater surveillance to detect how much of the virus was present in communities.

"We were one of the pioneering countries and we certainly advanced it at scale beyond what many other countries were able to achieve," he said.

But some provinces, including Ontario, have now made significant cuts to their wastewater surveillance programs, leaving many communities with "almost no data," Razak said.   


Canadian Press health coverage receives support through a partnership with the Canadian Medical Association. CP is solely responsible for this content.