
Assisted dying Bill process ‘thorough' says MP as colleague brands it ‘a mess'
An opponent of assisted dying has claimed a growing number of his Labour colleagues are 'deeply concerned' at the Bill's progress through Parliament as the MP behind it dismissed criticism of the scrutiny process as 'utter nonsense'.
Kim Leadbeater said the Bill had been through an 'intense' and 'thorough' two months of line-by-line scrutiny, and had emerged from the process 'even stronger, safer and more effective'.
But her party colleague James Frith, who opposed the Bill at its first vote last year, branded the proposed legislation 'a mess' with 'massive holes'.
The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill returns to the House of Commons this month for further debate, significantly changed from the one presented to MPs at the historic November vote.
The High Court safeguard has been dropped and replaced by expert panels, while the implementation period has been doubled to a maximum of four years for an assisted dying service to be in place should the Bill pass into law.
Eligibility remains with only terminally ill adults in England and Wales with fewer than six months to live.
The Bill proposes someone fitting this criteria should be legally allowed to end their lives, subject to approval by two doctors and an expert panel featuring a social worker, senior legal figure and psychiatrist.
The Bill's return to the Commons follows a committee process hailed by supporters as having strengthened proposed legislation and made it more workable, but which opponents have claimed was rushed and chaotic.
MPs are expected to vote on further amendments to the Bill at report stage on April 25.
If time allows, MPs could also vote on whether to approve the Bill at third reading – its final stage in the Commons – and decide if it is then sent to the House of Lords for further scrutiny.
Voting is according to conscience so MPs do not vote along party lines on this issue.
Ms Leadbeater said MPs have a 'duty as parliamentarians to change the law now', when asked about the prospect of her Bill not passing.
She was asked about suggestions an attempt to change the law could return in the form of a royal commission or government legislation, should MPs vote against her Bill in the coming weeks.
Referring to the last time an assisted dying Bill was debated and voted on in the Commons in 2015, which ended in defeat, she said it would be 'such a tragedy' if the conversation ended now and the subject was not revisited for another decade.
She said: 'What worries me is, if the Bill doesn't pass, the conversation ends, and that would be really dreadful for so many people, for so many reasons.'
Speaking at a press conference on the Bill which has been republished to incorporate the series of amendments made at committee stage, former director of public prosecutions Sir Max Hill described this as a 'once-in-a-lifetime' chance for much-needed change.
He said: 'It's a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, a once-in-a-generation opportunity, for parliamentarians of 2025 to say that – with all respect to where their predecessors were 60 years ago – they have found a better way which is going to improve the outcome for some of the most vulnerable people in society without… opening the door to a gradual broadening of the categories of people to whom this Act applies.'
He said the 'dial has turned' in the public debate on the issue, adding: 'We cannot go back.'
Sir Max added: 'There is time for anyone on receipt of the republished Bill to really consider it carefully – kicking this can down the road really is no solution for anybody.'
Ms Leadbeater described criticism of the scrutiny process of her Bill, including that it would be rushed and not be subject to proper debate or amendments, as 'utter nonsense'.
She said: 'We have spent hours and hours and hours on this work. Colleagues have dedicated huge amounts of time and energy to this, and we've now got important changes to make the Bill stronger. And I hope today that is very clear for everybody to see.'
But Mr Frith said a 'growing number of Labour MPs are deeply concerned that the Bill's progress is carrying on regardless'.
He added: 'The Bill as it stands is a mess, with significant issues of concern where there had been promises of scrutiny and improvement.'
He raised concerns around the 'unaddressed risk of coercion' and the removal of High Court protections.
He said: 'It is alarming that supporters of assisted dying are now presenting the flawed committee stage as an example of successful scrutiny.'
But domestic abuse expert and cancer sufferer Lesley Storey, said she believes the Bill 'provides a scaffolding of safeguarding that currently isn't happening' with regard to coercive control.
The chief executive of domestic abuse support service My Sister's Place told the press conference: 'The bottom line is, safeguards are absolutely baked into this Bill'.
Supporters have highlighted the requirement in the Bill for specific training for clinicians to assess whether someone has been coerced or pressured by another person.
MP and disability rights advocate Marie Tidball, who secured amendments to ensure the establishment of independent advocates to support people with learning disabilities, autism or mental health conditions and to set up a disability advisory board confirmed she would vote yes again at the third reading, feeling assured safeguards have been strengthened.
She told the press conference: 'I can say, as someone who has looked at legislative scrutiny over the course of the last 20 years, this is the most extraordinary, deliberative cross-party process I've ever seen.'
As well as criticism from MPs opposed to the Bill, the leader of Catholics in England and Wales Cardinal Vincent Nichols criticised the 'deeply flawed process' by which he said the Bill was progressing, as he urged parishioners to write to their representatives and urge them to vote no.
Former MP Caroline Ansell, who is now director of advocacy and policy at Christian Action Research and Education and is opposed to the Bill, called for a 'better conversation about truly life-affirming forms of support for dying people' and that the country 'can do better than assisted suicide'.
An impact assessment is expected to be published before the Bill returns to the Commons, with a minster previously saying efforts are being made to ensure MPs have 'ample time' to look at it in advance of their next vote.
Impact assessments look at economic, social and environmental impacts of Bills, including the likely costs and benefits and the associated risks.
Health Secretary Wes Streeting has previously suggested it could cost the NHS more if assisted dying is brought in.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Wales Online
20 minutes ago
- Wales Online
Nigel Farage on 20mph, coal mining and steel, as he explains vision for future for Wales
Our community members are treated to special offers, promotions and adverts from us and our partners. You can check out at any time. More info Reform UK leader NIgel Farage has spoken about his vision for the future of Wales, at a press conference today. He took to the stage just after 12pm in Port Talbot, with less than a year until the Senedd elections. His introduction had to be hastily rewritten given the UK Government's announcement, which went live at noon, that the winter fuel payment cuts are being partially reversed. Mr Farage said that Labour "knowing this press conference was taking place", announced they would make a fuel payment announcement at noon, as he was due to speak, but called it a "step in the right direction". He also announced independent councillors Andrew Barry and David Hughes, both members of Merthyr Tydfil council, have joined Reform UK, as they also took to the stage to explain how they had become disillusioned and moved to Reform. The most recent poll for Wales suggests his party is in line to take its first seats in the Senedd at the election in May 2026. Its only representation in Wales at the moment is with councillors, but a YouGov/Barn Cymru poll which asked people their voting intention for the Welsh Parliament in May put Reform UK in second with 25% of the vote. They were only behind Plaid Cymru who were projected to get 30% of the vote and ahead of Labour's 18%, reports Wales Online. In an opinion piece for WalesOnline, the party leader has given his first glimpses of policies ahead of the election. Mr Farage has said the party would allow coal mining again in Wales and says its long term plan is to "reopen the Port Talbot steelworks". The steelworks, owned by Tata, have not closed but its remaining blast furnaces were closed in 2024, with work now ongoing to build an electric arc furnace which will recycle previously-used steel. Thousands of jobs are being lost as part of the change. The Indian-owned company said the blast furnaces were at the end of their operational lives and too expensive to replace. The Port Talbot steelworks were, the company said, losing £1m a day before the blast furnaces were turned off. Reform UK say it would "use Welsh Development Grants to support real industry. We'll redirect economic funding from consultants and NGOs to actual factory floors, machinery, and industrial jobs in places like Llanelli, Shotton, and Ebbw Vale". Nigel Farage has also said the party would also set up "regional technical colleges" for people to have a "path into proper trade". (Image: Getty Images) The party would also, it says, stop any building being used for asylum seeker accommodation, end funding to the Welsh Refugee Council and scrap the Welsh Government's "Nation of Sanctuary". It also vowed to set up an Elon Musk style department to cut costs. "A Reform UK Senedd will also save hundreds of millions each year by cutting bureaucracy, waste and bad management. The establishment of Welsh DOGE will help us uncover where there is woke and wasteful spending and we will make sure those funds are redirected to frontline services," Mr Farage pledges. During the press conference Mr Farage also took aim at the controversial 20mph policy, saying he would reverse it. as he said he doubted the electric arc furnace at the Port Talbot Tata site would "every be switched on", but says their plan is to "reindustrialise Wales". He says in the coming years more steel will be needed and the UK should produce its own steel, and its own coal. "I'm not saying let's open all the pits, there are certain types of coal for certain types of uses, for the blast furnaces, we can use here," Mr Farage said, insisting it would be a small scale, specific mining and not like the "heydays of mining in Wales". Mr Farage also said there would be no going back on devolution, but criticised the running of Wales since. In response, a Welsh Labour spokesperson said: "Nigel Farage has no plans for steel - just a camera crew. You can't restart a blast furnace with a press conference. "Nigel Farage says that hopefully they mightthey'll bring back mining. The people of Wales will see through the false hope and false promises of a public-school boy from England who does not understand them and does not understand Wales. "His answer is to bring back the mines. The only thing Nigel Farage is trying to mine is votes from communities that have already gone through tough times. Nigel Farage has today brought his fantasy politics and magic money tree to Port Talbot. He's gambling with real people's livelihoods." Sign up for the North Wales Live newsletter sent twice daily to your inbox Find out what's happening near you


The Independent
23 minutes ago
- The Independent
60 minutes host issues dire warning over multimillion-dollar CBS settlement with Trump
CBS News veteran Scott Pelley has warned that a potential settlement between the network's parent company and Donald Trump would be 'very damaging' to the network and company and their reputations. 'It would be very damaging to CBS, to Paramount, to the reputation of those companies,' Pelley told CNN's Anderson Cooper on Saturday. Pelley compared a potential settlement to Trump's agreements with several law firms to provide pro-bono support to avoid sanctions from the administration after the president targeted firms and individual lawyers who represented his political opponents. 'I think many of the law firms that made deals with the White House are at this very moment regretting it. That doesn't look like their finest hour,' Pelley said. Trump's spurious lawsuit accuses the network's 60 Minutes program of favorably editing an interview with Kamala Harris during the 2024 campaign. Paramount, the parent company of CBS, is considering a settlement in an alleged effort to coax the Trump administration to approve a merger with Skydance Media. At 60 Minutes, 'everyone thinks this lawsuit is an act of extortion,' one correspondent recently told CNN. Those discussions resulted in the abrupt resignations of 60 Minutes executive producer Bill Owens and CBS News chief Wendy McMahon, with warnings from First Amendment advocates fearing the administration's chilling effect against the press and suggestions from members of Congress that the company could be breaking anti-bribery laws. Asked about Owens's resignation, Pelley echoed his blistering on-air statement that the longtime producer no longer believed that the network had lost 'the independence that honest journalism requires.' 'Bill's decision to resign may not have been much of a decision for him, because he was always the first person to defend the independence of 60 Minutes,' Pelley added. 'Bill didn't work for Paramount. Bill worked for our viewers, and he felt very keenly about that. I'm not sure Bill had any choice. Once the corporation began to meddle in Bill's decisions about the editorial content, or just place pressure in that area, Bill felt he didn't have the independence that honest journalism requires.' Pelley added that, on one hand, 'you really wish the company was behind you 100 percent,' while on the other hand 'my work is getting on the air.' 'While I would like to have that public backing, maybe the more important thing is the work is still getting on the air,' Pelley said. His comments on the network followed CNN's presentation of Broadway's Good Night, and Good Luck and a discussion of the state of American journalism. Pelley said the play — in which George Clooney as Edward R. Murrow spars with Senator Joseph McCarthy at the height of Red Scare hysteria — finds parallels in modern media under the current administration. 'I sense in the country today that there is also a fear to speak because it might wipe out your university, it might wipe out your law firm, it might ruin your career,' Pelley said. 'And the theme of all of that together today is that we have to have the courage to speak, as Americans, you can agree with the government or disagree with the government, but you must not be silent.' Without that courage, 'the country is doomed,' he said. 'It is the only thing that's gonna save the country,' Pelley added. 'You cannot have democracy without journalism. It can't be done.' His latest comments also echo his fiery commencement speech to Wake Forest University graduates against 'the fear to speak' in the United States. 'Power can rewrite history, with grotesque, false narratives,' he said in his address. 'They can make criminals heroes, and heroes criminals. Power can change the definition of the words we use to describe reality. Diversity is now described as illegal. Equity is to be shunned. Inclusion is a dirty word. This is an old playbook, my friends. There is nothing new in this.' In recent court filings, Trump's legal team claimed the president suffered 'mental anguish' over the 60 Minutes interview with Harris and argued that the network is using 'the First Amendment as a sword.' In a pair of objections filed in response to the network's motions to dismiss the defamation suit, which legal experts have described as 'frivolous,' the president's lawyers claim the president experienced personal financial harm from 'news distortion.'


STV News
25 minutes ago
- STV News
Rachel Reeves pins hopes of a reset on Spending Review
Each year, the chancellor gets to set a Budget – a moment to grab the nation's attention and show voters that the people running the country understand their struggles, and are on their side. It's supposed to be the annual set piece of any UK Government. But on Wednesday, Rachel Reeves will deliver a statement to the House of Commons that is arguably more important than any Budget she'll deliver. This week's Spending Review isn't even considered a 'fiscal event' – that means there shouldn't be any detailed tax and spending decisions at all. Instead, the chancellor is supposed to plot out overall public spending for the three years ahead, department by department. The reason it matters so much is because the UK Government is desperate to change perceptions of how it's managing the economy and the public finances. Even though she should have a few more Budgets left before the next general election, this could be Rachel Reeves' last chance to change course. Labour came to power with a brutal message when it came to the public finances – not 'things can only get better', but 'things are definitely going to get worse'. The idea was to show voters that finally, Labour could be trusted with people's tax money. That approach led Reeves to announce the slashing of Winter Fuel Payments as one of her first policies in office. But rather than building trust, taking help with energy bills away from millions of pensioners has been hugely unpopular. Bruised by the backlash, today the chancellor confirmed a U-turn and announced that millions of pensioners across England and Wales will have their Winter Fuel Payment restored – pensioners in Scotland had already been told by the Scottish Government that they will get a payment this winter, regardless of their circumstances. But the political damage has already been done, and many Labour MPs feel it could have been avoided if Reeves had toned down the tough economic message just a little, and not suffocated any sense of hope just a few weeks into office. The UK Government now faces another critical moment, and it can't afford to make the same mistake. After boosting investment and day-to-day spending in her first Budget, this week's spending review will put a much tighter squeeze on the public finances. Overall, spending will continue to rise, but by much less than in Labour's first year in power – and the biggest share of any additional cash will be swallowed up by the NHS, meaning many other departments and public services could see their budgets cut. The UK Government is anxious to rebut any claims that this is a return to austerity, and looking at public spending as a whole, that's true. But that doesn't mean there won't be more tough, unpopular decisions in the final years of this Labour government, as a result of this week's Spending Review. Most of those decisions will only directly affect public services south of the Border, but they will have an impact on the Scottish Government's overall budget in years to come. Facing the same pressures of rising costs and an ageing population, that means tough decisions down the line for whoever is in power at Holyrood, too. Without a bit more optimism than she's managed so far, the chancellor risks fuelling the trends in the polls, with Reform rising and Labour hitting new lows. And in Scotland, the economic narrative has also hurt Labour and given hope to the SNP – even though it was Scottish Labour that emerged victorious at the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse byelection. That win was very much against the odds, and in spite of the UK Government's unpopularity. This week represents Rachel Reeves and Keir Starmer's best chance of a reset. It could be their last chance, too. Get all the latest news from around the country Follow STV News Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country