Assisted dying bill fails to become law after running out of time in House of Lords

Assisted dying will not become law in England and Wales after proposed legislation branded “hopelessly flawed” by opponents ran out of time in the House of Lords amid claims of a “denial of democracy” from supporters.

The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, which had been making its way through Parliament for the past year and a half, fell on Friday with peers in the House of Lords speaking passionately on both sides of the argument.

While the Bill had successfully passed two votes in the House of Commons, albeit with a narrower majority on the second occasion, it did not face a vote in the Lords.

It instead ran out of time, with Lord Charlie Falconer – who had steered it through the upper chamber – saying he felt “despondent” that a piece of legislation which he said was “so important to so many, has not failed on its merits, but failed as a result of procedural wrangling”.

But pro-assisted dying campaign group Dignity in Dying insisted that “nobody should mistake delay for defeat”.

Describing today’s outcome as “deeply disappointing for dying people and their loved ones”, the group’s chief executive Sarah Wootton said: “ The principle of this reform has already been won.

MPs voted for change, the public overwhelmingly supports change, and every day this law is delayed more dying people are denied the compassion and choice they want and need.

“MPs from across Parliament are determined to bring this Bill back in the next session and finish what they started.”
The Bill had proposed allowing adults in England and Wales, with fewer than six months to live, to apply for an assisted death subject to the approval of two doctors and an expert panel.

Lord Falconer said the Bill had not failed to finish its journey through the Lords due to a lack of time, but rather “because a small minority were not willing to cooperate, as we normally do, to ensure that there can be proportionate debate”.

Tory former cabinet minister Lord Baker of Dorking accused opponents of the Bill of a “prolonged filibuster”, branding the situation a “denial of democracy”.

But paralympian Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson, who had spoken out against the Bill, said it had failed because “there are too many gaps in it” adding that she felt there was “a lot of misunderstanding about what people might get” under a law change.

Those opposed to the Bill have branded it “unsafe and unworkable” and “bad law”, citing their concerns around potential coercion of vulnerable people and a lack of safeguards for those with disabilities.

Baroness Campbell of Surbiton, a former commissioner at Britain’s rights watchdog the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), said disabled people had contacted her to say this “particular Bill frightens them, and they want me to explain to your Lordships why it is dangerous for them”.

The crossbench peer, who has spinal muscular atrophy, and addressed the chamber remotely, said disabled people “fear unequal access to care shaping their choices, they fear subtle coercion that cannot be easily detected”.

Supporters have vowed to try to bring the Bill back in Parliament’s next session, with its sponsor in the Commons Kim Leadbeater – who watched proceedings from the gallery on Friday – saying she will again enter her name in the ballot of private members’ bills.

Meanwhile, campaigners have said they could use the Parliament Act to get the Bill through if it was selected.

That Act, a rarely used piece of legislation, allows for Bills that have been backed by the Commons in two successive sessions but rejected by peers to pass into law without Lords approval.

Lord Falconer told peers: “It is clear that the issue will not go away, nor should it, until it is resolved.

Parliament can and must come to a decision.

It is now for the other place to decide what we do next.”
This is a breaking story – more follows...

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies