They wrote despite repeated assurances, ‘the proponents of the Bill have changed their argument—and fundamentally changed the Bill.’
A group of Labour MPs has criticised Kim Leadbeater’s proposal to replace High Court judge approval with a panel in her assisted suicide bill.
Currently, the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill requires approval from two doctors and a High Court judge for a person to legally end their life with medical assistance.
Leadbeater, who sponsored the private members’ bill, said that she wants to replace the High Court judge element with a Voluntary Assisted Dying Commission. This would include a social worker and psychiatrist and be chaired by a High Court judge or a former senior judge, removing the guarantee of the High Court overseeing all cases.
On Tuesday, a group of 10 Labour MPs who voted against the bill on its second reading said that “despite repeated assurances” that these safeguards would remain in place, they have been altered.
The statement shared on social media platform X on Tuesday said that every MP who had voted for the bill did so “with a promise of High Court scrutiny of each application for assisted dying” and that supporters were told it was a “key part” of the protections.
It continued: “Yet despite repeated assurances until just days ago the proponents of the Bill have changed their argument—and fundamentally changed the Bill.
Related Stories
“All MPs have an important job to do to make sure that the assisted dying bill is fit for purpose. Yet the process feels chaotic, with the Bill changing significantly from what was presented to Parliament at second reading.”
Safeguards ‘Collapsing’
Leadbeater, the Labour MP for Spen Valley, announced her plans in an opinion piece published in The Guardian on Monday night.
She said the changes were in response to evidence given during the earlier stages of the committee process and would make her bill “even more robust.”
Several MPs from across the political spectrum criticised the move, including Florence Eshalomi, one of the 10 Labour MPs to co-sign the statement criticising the proposals.
Eshalomi wrote on X: “The key safeguard that was used to persuade MPs who raised valid questions about the bill has now been dropped. To say this is worrying is an understatement.”
Labour MP and mother of the House Diane Abbott wrote on X that safeguards “are collapsing,” calling on MPs to vote down this “rushed, badly thought out legislation.”
Tim Farron, the former leader of the Liberal Democrats, also said, “Lots of MPs voted for the bill at 2nd reading in the expectation that there would be stronger safeguards added at committee stage… and yet we now see that even the weak safeguards that existed, are being dropped.”
Christian Action Research and Education (CARE) called the fluid nature of the debate “a cause for concern.”
A CARE spokesman said: “In places where assisted death is permitted, legal requirements have been relaxed or dispensed with altogether as campaigners pursue easier access by more groups of people. There is also evidence of changing practice on the ground.
“The direction of travel is always liberalisation, and we would expect a UK law to develop in this way. Parliament does not need to take this risk.”
Committee
Leadbeater’s proposals came a day ahead of a committee of 23 MPs starting line-by-line scrutiny of the bill.
The proposals have not yet been formally added to the amendment paper, so the exact wording is unknown. However, several MPs on the committee, including from Labour, raised concerns over the proposal, which they said changes the nature of the legislation.
They also expressed concern over the amount of time they have to read the volume of written evidence which is still coming in to the committee, and the new amendments which continue to be submitted.
Members of Distant Voices, Christian Concern, the Christian Medical Fellowship, and SPUC gather to protest the assisted suicide bill in Westminster, London, on Oct. 16, 2024. Lucy North/PA Wire
Conservative MP Danny Kruger said Leadbeater’s proposals “change the whole scope of the bill as proposed on second reading,” and asked whether it was possible for the committee to adjourn to allow for members to read the evidence and allow Leadbeater’s plans to be submitted and read before scrutiny of the bill commences.
Committee Chairwoman Esther McVey said it was up to the committee to move and vote on an adjournment.
McVey told MPs that it is “normal practice for evidence to come in and for it to me submitted as it comes in.”
However, she said that owing to the large amount of evidence and the importance of this bill, she would seek advice from the clerk.
Conservative MP Kit Malthouse, who supports the bill, added that it was the “natural process” of scrutinising legislation for information to continue to flow in, adding that there will be further room for debate at the bill’s report stage.
The committee stage is expected to last a few weeks, with the bill returning for scrutiny by the whole House of Commons for the report stage in April.
