I am grateful to all those who have taken the time to write to me about assisted dying and the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill 2024-25. Assisted dying is a complex and emotive issue and there are strongly held ethical and moral views on both sides of the debate.
Successive Governments, of both parties, have taken the position that the law on assisted dying is a matter of conscience for individual MPs. Therefore, in the second reading vote of Kim Leadbeater’s Bill on assisted dying, MPs voted without direction from their political party.
Deciding what to vote for has been a difficult decision due to the strongly held views of both sides of the debate. We also need to acknowledge that we need to fix the NHS and improve the standard of healthcare in this country, and this includes palliative care. Regardless of whether this Bill eventually becomes law, we all need to recognise this point.
During this vote, I voted for the Bill to pass its second reading. I did this for several reasons. The biggest reason why I voted this way is because I believe we need to allow individuals the freedom to make informed decisions about their lives. However, I will only support this as long as there are sufficient safeguards in place.
This Bill is different from legislation in Canada and some European countries which allow for wider eligibility to access assisted dying. This includes ‘unbearable suffering.’ In contrast, the legislation before MPs is based on the model used in Australia, New Zealand and the United States which only gives the choice of assisted dying to terminally ill, mentally competent adults. In particular, this Bill states that people will be able to end their lives only if they are in the final six months of their life and who have the mental capacity to do so. After reading the Bill, I believe it does have sufficient safeguards to protect people with vulnerabilities and people with disabilities.
Nevertheless, I am aware that many constituents and indeed other parliamentarians have concerns about the safeguards. Yet it is important to remember that, this was the first of potentially many votes on the Bill in Parliament. The Bill will now go to the Committee Stage. This is where a detailed line-by-line examination of the Bill takes place. Due to the widespread interest in this issue, I am sure many of my Parliamentary colleagues will be submitting amendments to the Bill. It will then have its remaining stages in the Commons. If it passes these stages, it will go to the House of Lords and the Bill will face similar scrutiny. Please note, that if the Bill is amended and the safeguards are altered this could change how I vote in later debates.
I also want to put on record that assisted dying should never become an alternative to high-quality palliative and end-of-life care. People deserve dignity in dying, and each person nearing the end of their life should feel reassured and safe in the knowledge they will receive the very best care.
Whilst I understand that you may agree or disagree with how I have voted, I have taken a considerable amount of time to engage with the arguments for and against supporting this Bill. I have not made this decision lightly. Going forward, I respect all points of view and acknowledge the concerns of both sides of the argument.
With this in mind, I will be closely monitoring the Bill’s passage and if I believe that the Bill does not have sufficient safeguards then I will make no hesitation to vote against the Bill.