logo
Assisted dying bill: When would it be available if Kim Leadbeater's bill passes?

Assisted dying bill: When would it be available if Kim Leadbeater's bill passes?

Independent5 hours ago

The assisted dying Bill is back in the House of Commons on Friday for a vote that could see it either fall or move on to the House of Lords.
Kim Leadbeater, the Labour MP behind the bill, said she is confident MPs will back her in the crucial vote, as she warned it could be a decade before the issue is put to parliament again should it fail to pass.
Since introducing her Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill in Parliament last year, Ms Leadbeater has argued dying people must be given choice at the end of their lives, but opponents of her Bill have warned it fails to guarantee protections for society's most vulnerable.
What is in the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill?
The proposed legislation would allow terminally ill adults in England and Wales, with fewer than six months to live, to apply for an assisted death.
This would be subject to approval by two doctors and a panel featuring a social worker, senior legal figure and psychiatrist.
The terminally ill person would take an approved substance, provided by a doctor but administered only by the person themselves.
When would assisted dying be available if the Bill became law?
The implementation period has been doubled to a maximum of four years from royal assent, rather than the initially suggested two years.
If the Bill was to pass later this year that would mean it might not be until 2029, potentially coinciding with the end of this Government's parliament, that assisted dying was being offered.
Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, who is the parliamentarian behind the Bill and put forward the extended timeframe, has insisted it is 'a backstop' rather than a target, as she pledged to 'hold the Government's feet to the fire' on implementing legislation should the Bill pass.
The extended implementation period was one of a number of changes made since the Bill was first introduced to the Commons back in October.
What other changes have there been?
The High Court safeguard has been dropped and replaced by expert panels – a change much-criticised by opponents who said it weakened the Bill, but something Ms Leadbeater has argued strengthens it.
At the end of a weeks-long committee process earlier this year to amend the Bill, Ms Leadbeater said rather than removing judges from the process, 'we are adding the expertise and experience of psychiatrists and social workers to provide extra protections in the areas of assessing mental capacity and detecting coercion while retaining judicial oversight'.
Changes were also made 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 to advise on legal implementation and impact on disabled people.
Amendments added earlier this month during report stage in the Commons will also see assisted dying adverts banned if the Bill becomes law, and a prohibition on medics being able to speak with under-18s about assisted dying.
Do we know much more about the potential impact of such a service coming in?
A Government impact assessment, published earlier this month, estimated that between 164 and 647 assisted deaths could potentially take place in the first year of the service, rising to between 1,042 and 4,559 in year 10.
The establishment of a Voluntary Assisted Dying Commissioner and three-member expert panels would cost an estimated average of between £10.9 million to £13.6 million per year, the document said.
It had 'not been possible' to estimate the overall implementation costs at this stage of the process, it added.
While noting that cutting end-of-life care costs 'is not stated as an objective of the policy', the assessment estimated that such costs could be reduced by as much as an estimated £10 million in the first year and almost £60 million after 10 years.
Do healthcare staff have to take part in assisted dying?
It was already the case that doctors would not have to take part, but MPs have since voted to insert a new clause into the Bill extending that to anyone.
The wording means 'no person', including social care workers and pharmacists, is obliged to take part in assisted dying and can now opt out.
Amendments to the Bill were debated on care homes and hospices also being able to opt out but these were not voted on.
Ms Leadbeater has previously said there is nothing in the Bill to say they have to, nor is there anything to say they do not have to, adding on the Parliament Matters podcast that this is 'the best position to be in' and that nobody should be 'dictating to hospices what they do and don't do around assisted dying'.
What will happen on Friday?
The Bill is back for third reading, which is the first time MPs will vote on the overall piece of legislation since the yes vote in November.
It is expected some outstanding amendments might be voted on first thing on Friday before debate on the Bill as a whole begins.
MPs voted 330 to 275, majority 55, to approve the Bill at second reading in November.
The relatively narrow majority means every vote will count on Friday, to secure the Bill's passage to the House of Lords for further debate and voting.
An an example, the Bill would fall if 28 MPs switched directly from voting yes to no, but only if all other MPs voted exactly the same way as they did in November, including those who abstained.
A vote would be expected to take place mid-afternoon.
What about assisted dying in the rest of the UK and Crown Dependencies?
The Isle of Man looks likely to become the first part of the British Isles to legalise assisted dying, after its proposed legislation passed through a final vote of the parliament's upper chamber in March.
In what was hailed a 'landmark moment', members of the Scottish Parliament (MSPs) in May voted in favour of the Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill, backing its general principles.
It will now go forward for further scrutiny and amendments but will only become law if MSPs approve it in a final vote, which should take place later this year.
Any move to legalise assisted dying in Northern Ireland would have to be passed by politicians in the devolved Assembly at Stormont.
Jersey's parliament is expected to debate a draft law for an assisted dying service on the island for terminally ill people later this year.
With a likely 18-month implementation period if a law is approved, the earliest it could come into effect would be summer 2027.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

If Donald Trump strikes Iran, Britain MUST back US and Israel to the hilt
If Donald Trump strikes Iran, Britain MUST back US and Israel to the hilt

The Sun

time23 minutes ago

  • The Sun

If Donald Trump strikes Iran, Britain MUST back US and Israel to the hilt

NO ONE knows exactly how close Iran is to making a nuclear weapon. Not least because it has banned international inspectors from finding out. 2 But their intention is clear. Iran is the only non-nuclear-armed country in the world to have enriched uranium at such high levels. Tehran's fanatical Islamists also want desperately to fire a nuke warhead at Israel and wipe it out. Donald Trump already offered Iran a way out — by giving up its nuclear programme. It responded with a bombing attack on an Israeli hospital. There is a powerful case for Trump to now order a bunker-buster bomb raid on Iran's underground network Not only could it destroy the mad mullahs' ambitions for a nuclear holocaust. It could also define his presidency. Strong intervention now will show other despots the US is back as a global deterrent force after Joe Biden 's humiliating Afghanistan withdrawal. So far, Sir Keir Starmer 's response has been insipid — trotting out the usual Foreign Office lines about the need for de-escalation. But if America strikes, Britain MUST back them and Israel to the hilt. Iran — with secret agents from its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps operating on our streets — is a threat to us, too. It's no surprise to learn that Attorney General Lord Hermer has warned Starmer that UK involvement 'could' be illegal. When it comes to national security, he has been on the wrong side of every argument so far. The Prime Minister needs to be crystal clear with Lord Hermer — and everybody else — that British interests lie with Israel and America. The stakes could not be higher. Paradise last SUCH is the new Europe-wide anti-immigration crackdown, Britain remains the last paradise for illegal migrants. Countries such as Denmark and Sweden are turning asylum-seekers away at the door. 2 Meanwhile, the UK escorts them across the Channel and puts them up indefinitely in hotels. If only we could follow Australia's example and cut numbers to next to nothing with a scheme to send migrants to a third country. Except we did have one. The Rwanda plan — spitefully scrapped by Labour — WAS working to deter migrants, who had started heading to Ireland instead. Australia's former foreign minister Alexander Downer, the architect of his country's successful scheme, calls that decision a 'tragedy' for Britain. We can only agree. One day, ministers will have to admit what a terrible mistake they made.

Students offered free rape test kits
Students offered free rape test kits

Telegraph

time38 minutes ago

  • Telegraph

Students offered free rape test kits

Students are being offered free rape test kits to collect and store the DNA of alleged attackers in an effort to combat sexual violence on university campuses. The set includes a swab for alleged victims to use on themselves at home and then send to a testing company, which freezes some of the genetic material in case they decide to report an attack to the police and need physical evidence. However, the creators of the initiative said its main aim was to act as a deterrent to non-consensual sex, because it would mean that any student would know that 'if you don't get consent, your DNA could stay on file'. Katie White, co-founder of not-for-profit organisation Enough, said: 'A lot of people see it as like the breathalyser. The existence of it prevents what it is designed to measure.' Ms White and fellow co-founder Tom Allchurch have piloted the initiative at the University of Bristol, where 8,000 students have been provided with the kits. The pair, who left their jobs to launch the venture with £100,000 from donors, are in talks with other universities, as well as police and crime commissioners, to run similar pilots in other cities. They said it was not a 'criminal justice' alternative to reporting a rape or sexual assault to the police – which users are advised to do if that is their intent. Instead, the duo said it was designed to provide an avenue for 'social justice' where victims report a potential offence that they might otherwise not take any further. The swab, similar to a Covid test pack, comes with a free post envelope to send to a lab which tests half the sample and freezes the remainder. Each student receives a number and DNA result, telling them if the material is male or female, but otherwise all details are anonymous. Each alleged victim is also provided with an encrypted digital account in which they can write down what happened, which could provide contemporaneous evidence if they subsequently decide to report a sexual assault to police. 'Most people who go to the police go a week afterwards,' said Ms White. Students are also advised to consider a checklist of actions such as taking pregnancy and sexual disease tests, while they are further offered access to online therapy videos by an established clinical specialist. Alleged victims are also given the opportunity to make an anonymous statement which can be publicised on social media. Ms White said: 'Ninety per cent of students don't report [sexual violence], they want to forget what happened and move on, rather than feel like they are turning it into a bigger deal. 'Many can be put off by... [the wait for a] trial, on average over two years. They know conviction rates are low, and they also fear that their friends may not believe them.' During the pilot scheme in Bristol, 200 students reported assaults or rapes, compared with just two who reported attacks to the university during the same time frame the previous year. Ms White said others had used the scheme to check if they had been a victim of date rape. A survey of Bristol students found 90 per cent knew about Enough, 70 per cent said they felt it had prevented sexual violence, and 86 per cent said they would report a rape to Enough. Ms White added: 'It is not about replacing criminal justice. It's complementary to it. The only thing that it is an alternative to is inaction. 'We not going to break this cycle of rape and sexual violence going up unless we have a form of reporting that victims are comfortable with and perpetrators feel threatened by.'

Loophole that lets terrorists enter UK to be closed
Loophole that lets terrorists enter UK to be closed

Telegraph

time39 minutes ago

  • Telegraph

Loophole that lets terrorists enter UK to be closed

Suspected terrorists will no longer be able to exploit a loophole that allows them to enter Britain despite being stripped of citizenship. Ministers are to pass legislation that will ensure citizenship is not automatically reinstated if terrorists successfully appeal against a decision to strip them of it. The loophole, identified by the Supreme Court, would mean that they could return to the UK while the Government sought to overturn the successful appeal. The terror suspects could then renounce any other citizenship that they had, which would mean that Britain would have no option but to allow them to stay in the UK and could not deport them. Under international law, governments cannot render a person stateless by stripping them of their citizenship if they are not citizens of another country. 'An essential tool' Official data suggests more than 1,000 Britons were deprived of their citizenship between 2010 and 2023, including Shamima Begum, one of three east London schoolgirls who travelled to Syria in 2015 to support the IS group. She fought a series of high-profile legal battles to return to the UK after being stripped of her citizenship in 2019, but has remained unsuccessful. It mirrors the case of two Pakistani members of one of the most notorious grooming gangs in Rotherham, whom the Government stripped of their British citizenship. Qari Abdul Rauf, a 55-year-old father of five and Adil Khan, 54, were jailed for their part in sexually assaulting 47 girls. They subsequently renounced their Pakistani citizenship, effectively declaring themselves stateless. Pakistan is refusing to take them back on the basis that they have renounced their citizenship and are regarded as dangerous criminals. Dan Jarvis, the security minister, said: 'Protecting our national security and keeping the British public safe is the first duty of this government and the foundation of our Plan for Change. The power to deprive someone of their British citizenship is an essential tool, and helps protect us from some of the most dangerous people. 'We must close this gap in the law and prevent British citizenship being reinstated to individuals until all appeals have been determined. This is the right thing to do if we believe someone is a threat to our national security, and it will make Britain safer.' For the public good The Home Office said deprivation decisions on 'conducive to the public good' grounds were taken only in the most serious cases by the Home Secretary, where it is in the public interest to do so because of the individual's conduct or the threat they pose to the UK. About 222 of the those deprived of citizenship between 2010-2023 were for the public good. In 2018, the number of appeals reached a record high of 88 as the UK sought to counter the threat from Islamic state fighters returning home. That was up from just five in 2011. The change in the law follows the similar approach taken in asylum and human rights appeals cases, where asylum is not granted to a person appealing a rejection until all further appeals, up to the Court of Appeal, have been determined. Home Office officials said the narrowly focused Bill, consisting of two clauses, made no change to a person's existing right to appeal any decision to remove their British citizenship, and did not widen the reasons for which a person could be deprived of their citizenship.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store