Stirling MP explains support for "compassionate" assisted dying plans
Chris Kane MP used his free vote on the legislation to express his support for proposals to regulate assisted dying for terminally ill patients.
Stirling's MP has explained the reasoning behind his backing for a historic assisted dying bill which narrowly secured support in the House of Commons last week.
The Terminally Ill Adults Bill, proposed by Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, gives terminally ill adults in England and Wales the chance to have the right to end their own lives if certain criteria are met.
The passage of the legislation at Westminster - which gained support by a margin of just 23 votes - follows a similar vote at Holyrood where the Scottish Parliament also gave its backing for proposals which would legislate for assisted dying in Scotland.
In the Commons vote last week, an emotionally charged debate saw MPs recount personal stories of seeing friends and relatives die as well as sharing both positives and concerns related to the legislation.
Stirling and Strathallan MP Chris Kane was one of those asked to vote on the bill - and he was one of 314 to support its passage.
Speaking to the Observer, Mr Kane said his vote would give people the opportunity to 'end their suffering on their own terms' and said the current arrangements had the impact of prolonging someone's suffering in a way deemed 'deeply unjust'.
He said: 'My decision to support the bill was shaped by careful thought and compassion, taken with full awareness of the moral and ethical complexities involved.
'I understand that some will be disappointed, and I want to acknowledge the sincerity and strength of feeling among those who oppose it. I respect those views, just as I hope my own are respected in return.
'In the United Kingdom today, individuals with mental capacity can legally refuse life-sustaining treatment, even if that decision leads to their death.
'Yet they cannot seek medical assistance to take an approved substance that would allow them to end their suffering on their own terms. For me, that is a contradiction that cannot be ignored.
'The current system can prolong suffering in ways that feel deeply unjust.
'This bill seeks to change that by offering terminally ill people the ability to make a considered and safeguarded choice at the end of life.
'I believe it is time to offer a compassionate, safe and clearly regulated choice for those nearing the end of their lives who want to take it.'
Mr Kane was also quick to praise the general level of debate from politicians on both sides of the argument - with members given the opportunity to exercise a rare 'free vote', away from party lines.
He added: 'In recent weeks and months, we have seen Parliament at its best: informed, considered and passionate, with respect shown across the House for those on all sides of the debate.
'I have spent a great deal of time reflecting on the Assisted Dying Bill, reading thoughtful emails from constituents, reviewing detailed briefings from organisations both for and against, and hosting constituency roundtables to listen to personal stories and different perspectives.
'I have followed the bill closely throughout its parliamentary journey and believe that it has evolved into a more balanced and carefully constructed piece of legislation than it was at the start.'
The Westminster legislation will now head to the House of Lords for scrutiny and further votes before it has the chance of becoming law south of the border.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
an hour ago
- The National
Will the SNP give more than warm words to help Scottish journalism?
This week's Behind the Headlines comes from content editor Xander Elliards. To receive the newsletter direct to your inbox every week for free, click here. IT is easier to learn about Scotland's green hydrogen industry from German television than from UK broadcasters, Culture Secretary Angus Robertson told a room of journalists and editors at Holyrood on Thursday. The remark was a stark reflection on the state of Scotland's media – one that grew sharper as Robertson continued. The SNP minister, himself a former BBC journalist, lamented the near-absence of foreign correspondents with regular slots in Scottish newspapers, saying he could count them 'on one finger' – a reference to The National's David Pratt. He acknowledged the broader crisis: Shrinking resources, job cuts, and a media landscape struggling under commercial pressures. A meeting was held in the Scottish Parliament on Thursday to discuss the fledgling Scottish Public Interest Journalism Institute (Image: Gordon Terris) 'Cuts, shrinkages to the industry – they've all had significant wider impacts on our institutions, culture, and society,' he said. 'Nevertheless, it's heartening to hear about the potential of the new institute and how it could be utilised to help support and preserve our independent publications and local titles and to ensure that we have an industry well into the future.' Robertson's reference was to the fledgling Scottish Public Interest Journalism Institute (SPIJI), which is set to officially launch next month (or thereabouts). SPIJI was recommended by the Scottish Government's own Public Interest Journalism Working Group – formed in 2021 to tackle the pandemic-era and structural threats facing Scottish newsrooms. Chaired by The National's founding editor Richard Walker, the institute aims to follow models such as the Dutch Journalism Fund: An arm's-length, state-backed body that invests in media as a democratic necessity. READ MORE: Seamus Logan: Using an election as plebiscite referendum is just not going to fly But progress has been slow, not least because the SNP have been reticent to give the group anything more than warm words. Back in 2022, when the idea was supported by the Scottish Government, Robertson said: 'We want to do all we can to support the sustainability and diversity of public interest journalism in Scotland and we will be working closely with industry stakeholders to see how an institute could help to ensure the sector remains resilient.' All they can, it seems, except put their money where their mouth is. At the meeting in the Scottish Parliament on Thursday, an array of Scottish writers, from freelancers and researchers to editors and reporters, spoke frankly about the state of the industry. One contributor described a vicious cycle: Falling print sales trigger cost-cutting and staff losses, quality declines, prices rise, readers abandon ship, and the spiral deepens. READ MORE: Assa Samake-Roman: We need to look at where our money vanishes to The cause is no mystery: Shareholders' pockets need to be lined, and public service journalism suffers. SPIJI offers an alternative. Its goal is to support local and independent journalism in ways commercial executives won't, and to defend Scotland's democracy by ensuring its citizens are informed. Because when the media falters, democratic accountability weakens. That's why the SNP's inaction on this matters. It is not enough to simply acknowledge the problem. If the Scottish Government truly believes a strong Scottish media is essential to a strong Scottish democracy, then it must do more than make speeches. It must fund that future. Our media needs more than warm words. It needs investment. Without it, who will tell Scotland's story?
Daily Mirror
an hour ago
- Daily Mirror
Keir Starmer warned against creating 'two tier' benefit system after U-turn
Keir Starmer said the Government's welfare reforms 'strike the right balance' after he made major concessions to Labour rebels to avoid a potential Commons defeat Keir Starmer is battling to push through watered down cuts to disability benefits as he faced warnings it would create a "two tier" system. In a dramatic climbdown, the Prime Minister offered a series of concessions to Labour rebels opposed to moves that would see hundreds of thousands of disabled people lose lifeline benefits. But campaigners said it risked "betraying the next generation of disabled people" - and some Labour MPs remain opposed ahead of a Commons vote next week. After fraught negotiations on Thursday, the Government agreed to protect all existing claimants from losing Personal Independence Payments (PIP). Plans to tighten eligibility will now only apply to new claimants from November 2026, in a reprieve to around 370,000 people who were due to lose around £4,150-a-year. And existing recipients of the health element of Universal Credit will have their incomes protected in real terms. The original plans to reform the welfare system were designed to save around £5billion from the benefits bill by 2030. But economists said the changes will cost around £3billion, on top of around £1.5billion for the U-turn on the winter fuel allowance, leaving Chancellor Rachel Reeves to make up the shortfall. No10 failed to rule out such raising taxes to foot the bill, saying 'tax decisions are set out at fiscal events'. Today, Mr Starmer said the reforms now "strike the right balance". "It's very important that we reform the welfare system, because it doesn't work and it traps people, and therefore we're going to press ahead with the reforms," he said. "We need to get it right. That's why we've been talking to colleagues and having a constructive discussion. We've now arrived at a package that delivers on the principles with some adjustments, and that's the right reform, and I'm really pleased now that we're able to take this forward." Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall said the Government had listened to concerns. She told broadcasters: "I think we're in a good place now, alongside the huge investments we are putting in to create the jobs that people need in every part of the country, to get waiting lists down in the NHS, to ensure stronger rights at work, but also to make sure there's employment support for those who can work and protections for those who can't." She insisted it was "very common in the welfare system that there are protections for existing claimants". Leading rebel Meg Hillier said she would now support the bill and is expected to drop her amendment, which had been signed by 126 Labour MPs. Ms Hillier, who chairs the Commons Treasury Committee, said it was "a good deal" involving "massive changes" to protect vulnerable people - and said disabled people would be involved in designing future reforms. She said: "It's encouraging that we have reached what I believe is a workable compromise that will protect disabled people and support people back into work while ensuring the welfare system can be meaningfully reformed." But Labour MP Nadia Whittome said "Even these revised proposals are nowhere near good enough and frankly are just not well thought through. It would create a two-tier system in both PIP and the UC system when somebody became disabled.' Andy McDonald, the Labour MP for Middlesbrough, said: "I'll be voting against it because it hasn't dealt with the totality of the is bringing about the change, it's just poverty delayed, or poverty postponed for millions of people in the future." Charles Gillies, Senior Policy Officer at the MS Society and Policy Co-Chair of the Disability Benefits Consortium, said: 'These supposed 'concessions' to the cuts bill are just a desperate attempt to rush through a disastrous piece of legislation. By pushing the cuts onto future claimants, the government are betraying the next generation of disabled people." He urged MPs to "stop this impending disaster" when the Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill comes to the Commons on Tuesday. Mikey Erhardt, Policy Lead, Disability Rights UK said: 'We completely reject the imposition of the two-tier system on offer. It is not a massive concession to have a benefit system where future generations of Disabled people receive less support than Disabled people today." He added: "By attempting to push through cruel cuts to the benefits of Disabled people, the Government prioritised balancing its books over improving the lives of Disabled citizens... the Government needs to stop playing politics with our lives." James Taylor, director of strategy at disability equality charity Scope, said: "It is encouraging that the government is starting to listen to disabled people and MPs who have been campaigning for change for months. "But these plans will still rip billions from the welfare system. The proposed concessions will create a two-tier benefits system and an unequal future for disabled people. "Life costs more if you are disabled. And these cuts will have a devastating effect on disabled people's health, ability to live independently or work. "We urge the government to properly engage with disabled people and MPs on how best to reform welfare and create an equal future."
The National
an hour ago
- The National
Inside a pivotal week on Skye's energy future as 50 more turbines
Three new planning applications — totalling 50 turbines up to 200 metres high — were lodged this week for sites at Glen Ullinish, Ben Sca, and Balmeanach. The developments add to the growing number of wind energy proposals across the island, with more than 130 turbines now either operational, approved, or awaiting consent. The timing of the new applications has drawn sharp criticism from community members already engaged in the inquiry over the Ben Aketil Wind Farm repowering. That project, led by developer Nadara, would double the height of existing turbines and extend the operational lifespan of the site. At the public hearing earlier this week, Highland Tory councillor Ruraidh Stewart said the pace and scale of development was putting serious pressure on local authorities and communities. 'I was really speaking on behalf of the community, saying that a lot of people had contacted me about this development as it came through the process. Public speaking isn't a natural thing for many — they don't want to get involved in inquiries, he said in an interview with The National after the session. 'What they're proposing for Ben Aketil is 200-metre wind turbines. That's hard to visualise with no context — but for comparison, that's about the height of the observation deck of The Shard. 'Putting something like that in the middle of Skye is just, by and large, inappropriate. I made the comparison in the inquiry: Skye is the second most visited tourist destination in all of Scotland, only behind Edinburgh. 'If someone proposed putting wind turbines on top of Arthur's Seat, they'd be laughed out of a planning meeting.' READ MORE: Lesley Riddoch: Highlanders are rallying against Scotland's energy land grab Landowners and campaigners have also raised doubts over the promised benefits of repowering. Charles MacDonald, who owns land near the Ben Aketil site, told the inquiry that developers were overstating local gains, revealing that no jobs had been promised. He shared that he had turned down three separate wind farm offers. Each company had made it clear that the construction phase wouldn't involve any local labour — workers would be brought in, complete the job, and leave. Just 1.2 maintenance positions are expected to be delivered from the repowerment at Ben Aketil. Campaigner Thor Klein (below), who attended this week's hearings, echoed that frustration. 'You've got consultants giving expert testimony who haven't even visited Skye. One of the cultural heritage experts admitted her whole report was done from a desk.' He said the inquiry revealed a 'lack of preparedness' by developers, and called on Scottish ministers to pause new approvals until a full review of the Scotland's energy strategy can be completed. 'Even the applicant had to admit there's no comprehensive plan connecting these various wind farm projects,' Klein said. 'That lack of oversight is frankly shocking. We're facing a massive infrastructure transformation, but there's no roadmap. This leaves local councils like Highland Council completely overwhelmed, because corporations push multiple developments simultaneously, hoping something sticks. 'It's not a sustainable governance model, and I hope the reporter takes note of that.' He also said there was 'little to no community benefit'. Nadara, the developer behind Ben Aketil, has claimed that its existing wind farm has delivered £700,000 in community benefits. But critics argue that amounts to just £1685 per megawatt—far below the Scottish Government's non-binding benchmark of £5000 per MW set in 2014. READ MORE: 53 community councils unite to demand Highland energy projects pause Stewart, who is also a crofter, noted the community was disillusioned with the process, but said he was glad to see so many locals attending the sessions throughout the week. 'By and large, the majority of the community opposes it. But there's a real disillusionment with the process. 'From what I've heard, the council, who objected, and the Skye Wind Information Group, who instructed their own experts, made very compelling points for refusal. 'But there's still doubt whether those views will be meaningfully considered. 'Look at the Ackron Wind Farm decision in East Sutherland. The government reporter recommended refusal, but Scottish ministers approved it anyway. 'There's a disconnect — a lack of trust that even after participating in the process, communities will be heard.' Originally the council objected due to peatland impact, in line with another statutory body. The developers then reconfigured the turbine layout to avoid some peat areas, and those objections were withdrawn. Stewart believes that on paper, the peat restoration plans sound reasonable. But the best protection for peat 'is not damaging it in the first place,' he said. 'Especially when so much of this power might never reach the market. Digging up thousands of tonnes of peatland in the name of green energy doesn't sit right with me. 'Peatland is vital for ecosystems, carbon storage, and climate resilience. 'The first Ben Aketil wind farm was supposed to operate for 33 years — now, 18 years in, they're digging it up and starting again. 'It happens time and again as turbines get bigger — they just dig up more.' Residents have also raised fears over infrastructure, emergency planning, and fire risk. Turbine components would arrive via the pier at Kyle of Lochalsh and travel by truck to remote sites on Skye. But Klein said there were no detailed transport plans provided yet — only verbal assurances. 'We're talking about massive vehicles on single-track roads,' he said. 'And no one has explained how they'll deal with emergencies—especially fires at battery storage sites, which local fire services are not equipped to handle.' Looking Ahead With more projects entering the planning system each week, residents fear a tipping point is approaching. 'Right now, there are three more applications on the table—this week alone,' said Klein. 'That's another 50 turbines. It's too much, too fast, with too little oversight.' As the volume of projects increases, pressure is growing on Scottish ministers to intervene. Both campaigners and councillors are calling for a coordinated national strategy that balances renewable energy goals with the protection of local communities and landscapes. 'I'm not against wind turbines or anything like that,' Klein said. 'it's really crucial to ask for a pause — to evaluate, think it through, and then make decisions. 'Because you're overwhelming local democratically elected bodies. It's a big danger."
