Parliament is changing its mind on assisted dying
There was a markedly different feel to today's debate on Assisted Dying. The last time the House debated Kim Leadbeater's Bill at the end of November, there was plenty of pep and self-congratulation among the speeches. But today, it was a decidedly more bad-tempered affair, as MPs met for the first day on the Bill's report stage, ahead of its Third Reading in a month's time.
There are four obvious reasons why today saw a shift in the mood of the House. The first was the chop-and-change of the Bill's safeguards during committee stage, with roughly 150 changes since the last vote. Labour's Florence Eshalomi gave one of the most powerful speeches, declaring she was 'even more worried now' about the Bill than before, citing coercion fears. Rebecca Paul, a Tory, claimed there had been a 'massive shift' in the Bill's emphasis from 'pain' to 'choice and autonomy.'
The second reason was Esther Rantzen's last-minute letter, published last night, accusing some MPs of being influenced by 'undeclared personal religious beliefs.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
36 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
LORD ASHCROFT: 'We can sniff Starmer's fear of Farage' say voters as they back winter fuel U-turn and insist two-child benefit cap must stay
Mrs Merton, the comic interviewer created by the late Caroline Aherne, famously asked Debbie McGee what first attracted her to the millionaire Paul Daniels. In the same satirical spirit, voters have been wondering what it was about the Reform party's surge in the local elections that prompted Keir Starmer to tighten his immigration policy and row back on cuts to the winter fuel allowance. Some welcome the winter fuel reversal and even give Labour some credit for listening and learning. More sceptical voters, of whom there are plenty, see a weak Government that can't make a decision and stick to it. Some wonder which taxes will rise to pay for the U-turn. On all sides, the link between Labour's plummeting popularity and the winter fuel climbdown is obvious (in my research, Starmer's explanation that his newfound largesse was the result of an improving economy just made people laugh). 'You've kind of gotta sniff a bit of desperation,' one 2024 Labour voter told us. The same is true of Starmer's recent conversion to tighter immigration controls, with promises of stricter education and language requirements and a longer wait for settled status. On this issue, voters are, if anything, even more doubtful – for at least three reasons. First, they don't think he means it: the human rights lawyer and free-movement advocate has not suddenly seen the merits of firm border control ('If that was what you truly believe, it should have been on the table months ago,' a Reform supporter said). Second, they don't think it will happen: my poll found only just over a quarter of all voters think Labour would succeed in cutting immigration numbers, even if it wanted to – which most think it doesn't. Third, they think he's aiming at the wrong target. As my poll also showed, people care much more about illegal migration, and the vast hotel costs that follow, than about those coming here legitimately to work. Some worry that Starmer's new rules will make it harder to recruit, especially in crucial areas such as the care sector, even as migrants arrive on our beaches in record-breaking numbers. In a double blow for Starmer, the people who take his new immigration rhetoric most seriously are the ones who like it least, often inside his own party. Most of them don't think he means it either, but some longstanding Labour voters find it profoundly depressing that the Prime Minister seems willing, as they see it, to pander to the Right. Many found his warning that Britain risked becoming an 'island of strangers' particularly worrying. 'When you're quoting Enoch Powell, I draw a line at that,' one told us last week. Evidently aware of these tensions, Labour figures are dangling the prospect of an end to the rule under which families can only claim child-related benefits for up to two children. This would please the Left and many party activists, but infuriate rather more than that. In my poll, most Labour voters backed the two-child benefit limit, while Conservatives and Reform voters did so overwhelmingly. They see it as an issue of fairness: 'I've got six children and I agree with the cap, because all the extra children I had, I've paid for,' one participant put it. These debates underline the dilemmas facing Chancellor Rachel Reeves as she prepares to unveil her spending review on Wednesday. With the economy struggling to grow under the weight of her extra taxes and regulations, she faces difficult choices over how to maintain public services – and the Government's new commitments on defence – while sticking to her fiscal rules. I found voters tend to want her to balance the books by controlling spending rather than raising taxes, but think she will do the opposite. Starmer has tried to divert attention from Labour's troubles by highlighting the contradictions in his opponents' plans. It is certainly true that Nigel Farage is offering simultaneously to slash taxes and boost spending – not least by scrapping the two-child benefit cap. But these attacks on Reform slightly miss the point. Those drawn to the party know its policies are a work in progress; it is the change of direction they want to see. They want a government that takes them seriously and puts Britain first. They won't be fact-checked into submission. More interesting is Starmer's acknowledgment that Reform is now Labour's chief opponent – a view shared by voters of all parties. Strikingly, my poll found Farage is considered the most likely of the current leaders to be PM after the next election. This is not good news for Kemi Badenoch. Most in my poll expected her to be swapped out before the election. This is not because it would be a good thing or would help the Tories' chances, but because that's what they believe the party does. No Tory leader has served a full term since David Cameron. The leadership circus has long been part of the Conservatives' problem. Another round would signal to many potential supporters that the party is not serious. And with Labour in trouble and Reform promising whatever it pleases, seriousness is above all what the Tories need to prove.
Scottish Sun
an hour ago
- Scottish Sun
Buoyant Sarwar pleads with PM to do more for Scots after by-election triumph
Scottish Labour leader Anas has urged Sir Keir to make the lives of Scots better to give him an 'easier' run into the 2026 Holyrood election. MUST DELIVER Buoyant Sarwar pleads with PM to do more for Scots after by-election triumph ANAS Sarwar has told Sir Keir Starmer he 'must do more' to help him convert the stunning Hamilton by-election win into kicking the SNP out of power. The Scottish Labour leader admitted the Prime Minister's rocky start to life in No10 had not been good enough on a number of fronts. 3 Anas Sarwar leader of Scottish Labour with by-election winner Davy Russell, right, and the party's deputy leader Jackie Baillie, left 3 Sir Keir Starmer And he urged Sir Keir to make the lives of Scots better to give him an 'easier' run into the 2026 Holyrood election. But Mr Sarwar — still 'buzzing' after Davy Russell's narrow victory in Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse — insisted: 'Scotland is one step closer to changing the SNP government, from booting them from office and electing a Scottish Labour government. But we still have got hard work to do. "Keir Starmer knows what he has to do as Prime Minister to improve the lives of people here in Scotland and across the UK, and he knows he has to do more, and demonstrably more, over the course of the next year. 'I want a UK Labour government to deliver for people in Scotland, and the context of that, of course, makes conversations and makes campaigns easier. 'And they recognise that they have to do more to improve people's lives.' His comments come after Scottish Labour — relegated to third place by the bookies and political commentators before last Thursday's vote — surged to victory over the SNP and Reform UK. And in an exclusive interview with The Scottish Sun on Sunday, Mr Sarwar said: 'I want to earn the right to be in government, earn the right to be First Minister. 'I want to earn the right to change the direction of our country. And that's what I'm going to try hard to do.' Mr Sarwar had cut a despondent figure in recent months after seeing his party plummet in the polls after being neck-and-neck with the Nats last year. Recent surveys before the by-election confirmed a slump from a high of 37 per cent in the constituency vote to 19 per cent, and from 34 per cent in the regional list stats to 18 per cent. Anas Sarwar reacts to Labour's shock win and reveals why voters backed the party Meanwhile the SNP has barely shifted from 33 per cent and 28 per cent support in the respective measures. The dip came after Labour trounced the Nats in last July's General Election, returning 37 MPs to Westminster after previous near wipeouts in Scotland in 2015 and 2019. Mr Sarwar struggled to defend the UK Labour government's decisions, including Chancellor Rachel Reeves axing winter fuel payments for pensioners and raising employer National Insurance contributions — which experts say heightened discontent. But he was visibly energised from the by-election win when he spoke to us after his party secured 31.6 per cent of the Hamilton vote compared to the SNP's 29.4 per cent. Mr Sarwar — who has clashed publicly and privately with Sir Keir — admitted it had been a 'challenging number of months'. He added: 'We have to have a clearer demonstration from a UK Labour government that we are improving the lives of people here in Scotland. I make no bones about that. In fairness to Keir Starmer, he makes no bones about that too. He accepts that that has to happen.' But Mr Sarwar now feels able to turn his fire on First Minister John Swinney — and also have a pop at political pundits. He said: 'I've never felt that the underlying fundamentals have changed. I've always believed they were still good for us and very bad for the SNP. 'What was deeply frustrating, and actually the by-election has helped in this, is there was this overlaying theory amongst the political commentariat and pollsters that everything was framed around a UK Labour government. What John Swinney has tried to do over the course of the last ten or 11 months is he has very deliberately retreated from the real public debate, just withdrawn anything meaningful from the government, so they just go quiet and hope the public only focus on a UK Labour government and therefore he sneaks in through the back door. 'I think that's his entire strategy. But it's burst. It's done. He's not got it. The SNP's finished. 'The question now is what replaces them. 'And ultimately that's only the Scottish Labour Party.'
The Sun
2 hours ago
- The Sun
Grooming gangs national inquiry demands grow as Tories force vote on new probe into ‘disgusting' crimes
LABOUR MPs will be put under pressure as Tories force a vote on holding a national grooming gangs inquiry. The Conservatives are tabling an amendment to the Crime and Policing Bill which calls for a statutory inquiry into the scandal later this month. 3 3 They say Labour's plan for five local inquiries is inadequate because the scale of abuse was much wider. And they do not have the power to summon witnesses and requisition evidence. It will put Labour MPs in a tricky position as some have gone against the party to call for a national inquiry. And it could trigger a Red Wall rebellion. Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp said: 'We now know that these disgusting crimes were deliberately covered up by the police and local authorities simply because the majority of the perpetrators were of Pakistani heritage. 3 "The young girls - some as young as 12 - had their lives ruined. 'The cover-up has to end and those who hid these crimes held to account. 'It is disgraceful that not a single person has been punished for the cover-up. 'Every decent Labour MP who cares about this should vote for our amendment in Parliament.'
