UK MPs Divided On Ban On Assisted Dying Adverts
Protestors both for and against the bill gathered outside parliament, as lawmakers debated the contentious proposals for legalised euthanasia currently making their way through parliament.
Opening the debate, the legislation's sponsor MP Kim Leadbeater proposed an amendment to her bill which would require the government to introduce regulations banning advertisements promoting assisted dying services.
But bill opponent Paul Waugh, advocating his own tighter amendment to prevent ads, warned that unforeseeable "exceptions" could make Leadbeater's ban "worthless".
"Advertising works because we human beings are suggestible. Prone to messaging, visual clues and hints. Older people are bombarded with adverts for everything from stairlifts to care homes," he said.
"One person's advert, though, is another person's public information campaign," he added.
The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill is at the report stage of the lengthy parliamentary process, where lawmakers can propose amendments.
The bill would allow assisted suicide in England and Wales for adults with an incurable illness who have a life expectancy of fewer than six months and are able to take the substance that causes their death by themselves.
Following a debate in parliament last November, MPs backed the proposed legislation by 330 to 275 votes.
Campaign group Dignity in Dying hailed that result as a "historic step towards greater choice and protection for dying people", but Christian Concern called it a "very Black Friday for the vulnerable in this country".
According to media reports some lawmakers who previously supported the bill could withdraw their backing over concerns around safeguards to protect vulnerable people who might feel pressured into assisted dying.
Medical opinion is also divided, with the two doctors' bodies -- the Royal College of Physicians (RCP) and the Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych) -- expressing concern.
Others remain supportive, including seven RCPsych members who wrote to MPs distancing themselves from their college and describing the bill as "workable, safe and compassionate".
Members will have a final vote at the bill's next stage -- the third reading. It would then face another vote in the Lords upper house.
Leadbeater's initiative is a so-called private members' bill and is not part of the government's agenda, although Prime Minister Keir Starmer voted in favour at the November reading.
A change in the law would see Britain emulate several other countries in Europe and elsewhere who allow some form of assisted dying.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
35 minutes ago
- Time of India
Now, women in state can work in night shifts as Prez gives assent to bill
1 2 Ranchi: President Droupadi Murmu gave her assent to the Factories (Jharkhand Amendment) Bill, 2023. The President's office sent the file to the Raj Bhavan, which, in turn, forwarded it to the state govt, officials said on Thursday. The Factories (Jharkhand Amendment) Bill, 2023, was tabled in the state assembly on Aug 2, 2023. Once it becomes an Act, it would pave the way for women to work night shifts in the state. The Factories Act, 1948, which is in force in Jharkhand, does not allow women to work between 7 pm and 6 am. "The bill was passed by the state assembly and forwarded to the Raj Bhavan, which, in turn, referred it for the President's assent. We received the assent on Wednesday and forwarded it to the state govt," a Raj Bhavan official said. Speaking to TOI, Jharkhand chief factories inspector Manish Kumar Sinha said, "The state govt will send the file to the state labour, employment, training and skill development department, which will forward it to my office. We will notify it in the state gazette. The new rule will come into force the day it is notified in the gazette. It will take about a week or 10 days." He added, "The amendment would ensure participation of the women workforce in industries. Many industries, which function round the clock, had expressed their interest in employing women, but could not as only a general shift was available for them. The new rules, which are industry-friendly, will increase women's participation in the workplace, which is very meagre at present." Stay updated with the latest local news from your city on Times of India (TOI). Check upcoming bank holidays , public holidays , and current gold rates and silver prices in your area. "Get the latest news updates on Times of India, including reviews of the movie Coolie and War 2 ."
The Wire
40 minutes ago
- The Wire
‘Disenfranchising People While Passing Bills in Parliament': TMC MP Sushmita Dev
New Delhi: Amid the ongoing protests by the opposition during the monsoon session of parliament demanding a discussion on the special intensive revision (SIR) of the electoral rolls in Bihar, the government has pushed ahead with legislative business and passed crucial Bills, including the new income tax Bills, and two Bills relating to sports governance: the National Sports Governance Bill and the National Anti-Doping (Amendment) Bill. Trinamool Congress (TMC) MP Sushmita Dev in an interview to The Wire said that voters from whom legislators derive their mandate are being asked to prove the genuineness of their right to vote even as Bills are being passed in parliament. 'As Abhishek Banerjee [TMC general secretary and Lok Sabha MP] has said, according to the Election Commission (EC)'s own inquiry, 65 lakh voters have been removed [from the draft rolls in Bihar]. So this brings into question the 2024 elections also. How can this Lok Sabha continue?' she said. 'You cannot say that people will spend their time, money and energy proving the genuineness of their right to vote on the one hand, and the rest of us are sitting in parliament elected by these very people [on the other]. We get our mandate from people. You are disenfranchising people and you are passing Bills in parliament?' The government's move to push ahead with the bills comes as the opposition march to the Election Commission on Monday was stopped and MPs were detained. Meanwhile the stalemate between the opposition and treasury benches has continued over a discussion on the SIR. Read edited excerpts of the interview below: 1. The TMC was one of the first parties to allege irregularities in the voter rolls. The EC has cited some of these concerns that the TMC itself raised to conduct the SIR. If voter rolls are to be purified, why the opposition to SIR? There is a dual mischief – on the one hand, they have made the SIR into an exclusionary process. The EC's job is to make democracy stronger so that more and more people participate in this democratic process, but the SIR is turning into an exclusionary process. On the other hand, as Mamata Banerjee pointed out in February, while you are taking out voters because of lack of documents, we are seeing duplicate EPICs [elector photo identity cards]. Who issues the EPIC? It is the EC. You are excluding massive numbers like 65 lakh on the one hand, and on the other hand you are encouraging false voters and the duplication of voters. This is a multipronged process that is making a mockery of the democratic process. 2. Your party has alleged that the SIR is being used to usher in a National Register of Citizens (NRC) through the backdoor. Why do you say so? The EC has every right to remove people who have died or migrated. We accept there should not be foreigners, but deciding who is a foreigner is a mandate that lies with the Union home ministry and not the EC. It is not that the TMC or any opposition party is advocating for foreigners in the electoral rolls. Under the Citizenship Act, 1955, the home ministry is the relevant authority and once the home ministry determines after an inquiry through the NRC or the NPR [National Population Register] that somebody is a foreigner, then the EC will remove that person. The EC cannot make that inquiry on its own. 3. If voter roll purification is to be done, how would the TMC propose that it be done? If an exercise like the SIR is to be done, all political parties should have been brought on board. This exercise should have been spread over months so that awareness is created, and political parties are involved in creating that awareness. The rush with which it is being done, given the profile of our electorate which includes the marginalised, poor and those who live in remote areas, where not everybody is highly educated, this is becoming an oppressive measure. This is not only against the constitutional mandate but also against the spirit of the constitution. 4. The opposition's march to the EC's office on August 11 was stopped and MPs were detained. The EC says they were ready to meet 30 MPs. Why couldn't a decision be taken to send a delegation of 30 MPs? The EC is not ready to listen. We decided we will march to the EC with our demands – a peaceful protest with the demand that the SIR has to stop. They give a letter one day before to say only 30 people can come to meet us. The move to not give machine-readable data, questions over a surge in votes after 5:30 pm – these are questions that have to be asked. You have negated all this and now when we have decided to come to you, you say only 30 people will come. Why will 30 people come? Who will decide the number? If the EC had bonafide concern about what we are saying, it should have been handled differently. Since you are planning to do an SIR across the country, should you have not called all political parties? The NRC in Assam was a Supreme Court-monitored exercise that continued for six years. Till today, have they notified the NRC? A process that took six years, monitored by the Supreme Court and conducted by the home ministry under the registrar general, why hasn't it still been notified? What you could not do in six years that you want to do in six months? 5. The monsoon session has been almost a washout barring the discussion on Operation Sindoor, with the government and the opposition at a stalemate over a discussion on the SIR. The government says that the EC is an independent constitutional body and cannot be discussed in parliament. How do you respond to that? We are saying that the SIR is directly impacting the democratic rights of every citizen; the concept of 'one man, one vote' is under challenge. The question is, why can't the people's concerns be debated in parliament? They are talking about the autonomy of the EC. But every procedure that it embarks upon – whether it is delimitation or anything else – you have to involve all political parties. Autonomy does not mean that you embark on this massive enquiry without any consensus with political parties. 6. With the monsoon session due to end in a few days, will this stalemate continue? The government has already said that they have no option but to continue with legislative business. Amid opposition protests, crucial Bills like the Income Tax Bill, the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Bill, the National Sports Governance Bill and the National Anti-Doping (Amendment) Bill have been passed. Important Bills like the Sports Governance Bill should have been sent to the standing committee. But they bulldozed these Bills through parliament, just like they did for the three farm Bills, which they paid a price for. It is a bad precedent they are setting because they fear scrutiny and accountability. As Abhishek Banerjee has said, according to the EC's own inquiry, 65 lakh voters have been removed. So this brings into question the 2024 Lok Sabha elections also. How can this Lok Sabha continue? You cannot say that people will spend their time, money and energy proving the genuineness of their right to vote on the one hand, and the rest of us are sitting in parliament elected by these very people [on the other]. We get our mandate from people. You are disenfranchising people and you are passing Bills in parliament?
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
Uttarakhand to toughen anti-conversion law; life imprisonment, ₹10 lakh fine proposed — check details
The Uttarakhand government's move to bring another legislation to amend the Uttarakhand Freedom of Religion Act is expected to make the law even more stringent. The amendment, approved by the state cabinet, aims to prevent religious conversions through coercion, fraud, or undue influence. The amendment legislation, approved by the state cabinet on Wednesday, proposes a maximum punishment of life imprisonment and a fine of up to ₹ 10 lakh for forced conversion. Currently, the maximum prison term for the offence in the state is 10 years and the highest fine is ₹ 50,000. This is the second legislation to amend the Act, which has been in force in the state since 2018. The first amendment was made in 2022. The Pushkar Singh Dhami-led government is preparing to introduce the legislation during the monsoon session of the state assembly, which is scheduled to begin on August 19, reported news agency PTI, citing sources. According to the Uttarakhand Freedom of Religion (amendment) legislation, 2025, fraudulent or forced conversion would be a cognizable and non-bailable offence. In such cases, police will be allowed to arrest an offender without a warrant and bail will be granted only if the trial court (sessions court) is convinced that the accused is not guilty and would not repeat the offence. "Yet another amendment legislation to make the law even more strict has been occasioned by recent cases of conversions in the state aimed at demographic change," PTI quoted Ajendra Ajay, BJP leader and former chairman of Badrinath-Kedarnath Temple committee, as saying. Terming the cabinet's decision as historic, Ajay said: "An amended act with stricter provisions will work as a strong deterrent for potential offenders and help preserve the original identity of a border state like Uttarakhand, which is also known as Devbhoomi." The Bill also expands the definition of inducement to include any gift, gratification, easy money, or material benefit in cash or kind, employment, free education, promise of marriage, hurting religious faith, or glorifying another religion, categorising all of them as crimes. It also makes punishable acts such as promoting or inciting conversion through social media, messaging apps, or any online medium.
