Back my assisted dying bill or face another decade of death without dignity, Kim Leadbeater warns MPs
Kim Leadbeater has made a last-minute plea to MPs to support her assisted dying bill, warning that if it is rejected on Friday, terminally ill adults could face a ten-year wait before the issue is debated again.
In an emotional plea ahead of Friday's final Commons vote on the Terminally Ill Adults bill, the Labour MP asked how many more would suffer dying without dignity if MPs reject her plans.
' If we don't pass this law tomorrow, it could be another decade before this issue was brought back to parliament,' she told a press conference in Westminster.
Flanked by MPs from across party lines, as well as a group of assisted dying campaigners, Ms Leadbeater added: 'It's 10 years since we last had a vote. If we leave it now, I worry it could be a heck of a long time.
'And in that time, how many more stories will we hear like Katie, Pamela, Anil and Sophie.'
The four campaigners had shared stories of their own experiences with terminal illness or of the anguish around the deaths of loved ones who could have benefitted from assisted dying.
One of the campaigners at the press conference, Sophie Blake, who has been living with stage four secondary breast cancer for three years, said: 'I have come to terms with the fact my life has been shortened and I do not fear death. But I do fear how I will die.'
She is allergic to most opioids, and said: 'The thought of not being able to control my pain and suffering hangs over me'.
'I want my daughter and my family's last memories of me to be happy and wonderful times, not being left traumatized by seeing me in agony,' she added.
The assisted dying vote is on a knife-edge, with expectations there could be decided by just 10 to 15 votes. Campaigners against the legislation called at the last minute for a delay to the crunch final vote, with 52 Labour backbenchers asking Sir Keir Starmer to step in and give MPs more time to scrutinise the bill.
But the prime minister rejected the call, saying there 'has been a lot of time discussing it, both in parliament and beyond parliament'.
Asked whether she is confident the bill will pass, Ms Leadbeater said she expects MPs to back it comfortably.
She said: 'We had a good majority of 55 at second reading, there may be some small movement in the middle, some people may change their mind one way, others may change their minds the other way.
'But fundamentally, I do not anticipate that the majority will be heavily eroded. I feel confident we can get through tomorrow successfully.'
It came after the last minute letter from 52 MPs warned: 'This is not a normal Bill. It alters the foundations of our NHS, the relationship between doctor and patient, and it strips power away from Parliament, concentrating it in the hands of future Health Secretaries.
'MPs will be arriving at Westminster on Friday morning without sight of the final version of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill.'
If, as expected, the Bill passes its final stage on Friday it will then go to the Lords where peers have warned that they intend to heavily scrutinise the legislation.
Among the issues still facing questions is the problem of potential impacts on those with disabilities and coercion to end lives early among the vulnerable.
The Whitestone polling was commissioned by the disability group Not Dead Yet UK and also found that six in ten agree that some disabled people could be coerced into assisted suicide by others who do not have their best interests at heart. This rises to 64 per cent for people polled who are disabled.
It also found 57 per cent agree that disabled people who struggle to access the support they need, given the current state of the NHS and social care funding, may be more likely to seek assisted suicide instead while only 17 per cent disagree.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
27 minutes ago
- BBC News
Abingdon reservoir plans 'nationally significant'
A plan to build one of the UK's largest reservoirs will be considered by the government, after it was designated as a Nationally Significant Infrastructure £2.2bn South East Strategic Reservoir Option, near Abingdon, Oxfordshire, is a Thames Water project to cope with increasing demand and climate decision to designate the proposal as nationally significant means it will be considered by the government, not the local planning Water, which plans to submit its proposal in 2026, says the new reservoir would secure water supply for 15 million people across southern England. Water Minister, Emma Hardy, said the government was "intervening in the public interest to speed up the planning process and unblock new reservoirs"."This Government will secure our water supply for future generations while protecting the environment and unlocking the building of thousands of homes as part of the Plan for Change," she added. In January, Chancellor Rachel Reeves indicated government support for the Abingdon it has met with environmental objections from the Campaign to Protect Rural England - as well as from Oxfordshire County Council and Vale of White Horse District week a judicial review into Thames Water's proposals for the reservoir is set to take place at the High follows Environment Secretary Steve Reed's approval of the water company's Water Resource Management Plan - which includes the reservoir scheme - last Water's proposals would see the 150 billion litre (150 Mm3) reservoir cover 7 sq km (2.7 sq miles) of Oxfordshire water company said it would "unlock economic growth, support new housing and infrastructure development, and create around 1,000 jobs during its construction".It added that an independent company would finance and build the reservoir, which would "deliver better value for money" for customers. Nevil Muncaster, the company's strategic water resources director, said: "While we've always known our proposed reservoir is of national importance, the Government's recognition brings us one step closer to securing water supply for 15 million people across the South East.""Although this project has achieved national significance, local communities remain at the heart of our plans," he Water will be hosting four community information events next month to share updates and speak to local people about the company will also hold a statutory consultation later this year, ahead of its planning submission in 2026. You can follow BBC Oxfordshire on Facebook, X (Twitter), or Instagram.
The Independent
28 minutes ago
- The Independent
Can Starmer afford to join Trump in an open-ended war?
In taking so long to respond to what is now a full-on war between Israel and Iran, Donald Trump has done the UK's prime minister a big favour. A US decision on the side of direct military intervention would present Keir Starmer with the greatest quandary yet of his year at No 10 – whether to offer UK support, and if so, how much, in what form, and for how long. The prime minister has already warned against any action that would 'ramp up the situation', that 'cooling tensions' and 'de-escalation is the priority' – and that, despite 'grave concerns' about the threat of Iran's nuclear programme, the British government is 'urging all parties to show restraint and return to diplomacy'. While Trump ponders on whether to join Israeli strikes on Iran, there is, in the words of the prime minister's official spokesman, a 'real risk of escalation'. And yet the longer the US president takes to make up his mind, the longer Starmer has to weigh up the pros and cons of the UK following its closest ally into a war that could engulf the whole of the Middle East. And the only really good option from London's perspective would be if Trump decided to keep the US, officially at least, on the sidelines. Any direct military intervention, and the UK, one way or another, has to choose. In essence, this is the dilemma that has long lurked somewhere in the nexus between the UK's departure from the European Union and the election of Donald Trump to a second term. These two developments left the UK straddled awkwardly mid-Atlantic, between an EU it no longer belongs to and a US out of sympathy with Europe on practically everything, from tariffs to collective security. Now may be the moment of truth. Were the US to decide to intervene, the UK could just about persist in its current holding pattern and do no more. That would mean repeated (vain) calls for de-escalation; new warnings to hard-pressed consumers about higher energy prices (with the blame now pinned on Iran, rather than Russia), more travel bans and terrorist alerts. The UK might also provide a much-needed channel to Tehran, given that David Lammy has, so far, kept up communications with his Iranian counterpart. Going some way, but not the whole way, to support the US – by offering facilities at UK bases in, say, Cyprus, could, however, present risks, including the risk of reprisals from Iran. The danger may be less now, given what appears to be Iran's debilitated state from Israeli air strikes. But the UK's early and categorical denial that the US had used Cyprus as a transit point for the extra air power it sent to the region showed that London clearly understood the potential risk. Not offering the US direct, or even partial, military support, however, could have costs of its own. Trump is regarded as prizing loyalty above almost anything else. Where would a passive UK stance leave the 'special relationship'? Might Trump re-consider the tariff concessions he has agreed for the UK? Might the US scale back intelligence cooperation (as it threatened over the UK's telecoms ties to China)? Might the UK lose what it sees as its privileged position in Washington to, say, Germany, whose new chancellor Friedrich Merz seemed to be auditioning for leader of Europe during his recent visit to the White House and been more forthright in support of Israel's action than Starmer? On the other hand, the balance between aiding and not aiding the United States in a new war may be finer than it may look from this single, close, vantage point. How special is that special relationship? Harold Wilson managed to keep Britain out of Vietnam without undue, long-term damage. Contrast this with Tony Blair's near-unconditional support for the US in Iraq. This bought exactly how much political capital for him or his government in Washington over the longer term? As for the damage to the domestic reputation of the UK intelligence services and the influence of the UK in the Middle East, that has been huge and lasting. At the time, however, Blair's argument was not just about security – destroying the supposed threat from Iraq's (as it turned out, non-existent) chemical weapon – but also about principle. He, like George W. Bush, was seduced by the promise of the 'freedom' and 'democracy' that were forecast to follow 'regime change', which may also be an objective of Israel's war on Iran. It is hard to believe that Starmer and Labour's leading lights today could be similarly seduced, given the experience not only of Iraq, but of Libya and Afghanistan, and of David Cameron's narrowly lost vote in Parliament over intervention in Syria. But might the current Parliament vote to support a UK military intervention on other grounds, such as the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran or the view that Israel's very existence is threatened? That cannot be excluded. But the gulf that would then be exposed between MPs voting to put the UK in harm's way for the sake of Israel, and the weight of public opinion that condemns Israel because of Gaza, could present Starmer with big political difficulties, despite Labour's majority. A parliamentary debate could also open up the bigger picture. One of the arguments that raged during my childhood was whether the UK should keep a military presence 'east of Suez'. The upshot was that it sort of did, and it sort of didn't, but the UK's interventions in Afghanistan and Iraq had the effect of deciding the issue to this day. As it happens, the Israel-Iran war has erupted barely two weeks after the government published its Strategic Defence Review, which identified Russia as the biggest threat facing the country, recommending a 'Nato-first' policy and higher defence spending to address this threat. There was no mention of the UK becoming embroiled in a new and potentially open-ended war in the Middle East. With its self-accepted status as a medium-sized power, a pared-back military, and capabilities increasingly focused on Russia, the UK is likely to find its resources severely stretched in the event that Starmer decided in favour of actively helping the US in the Middle East. However the Israel-Iran war ends, the 'east of Suez' discussion needs to be re-opened, with the UK's present capacity and priorities in mind. In the meantime, the difficulty for Trump should not be minimised. He campaigned on a pledge to keep the US out of far-away, forever wars, and prides himself on the – correct – fact that the US avoided any new wars in his first term. He is clearly in two minds about Israel and Iran. Long, Starmer and his government must hope, may his indecision continue.
The Independent
37 minutes ago
- The Independent
Nine years on from Brexit, most Brits want to see the UK return to the EU
Nearly nine years on from the narrow Brexit referendum result, which saw the UK leave the European Union, most Britons want to see the UK return to the EU. A new YouGov poll highlights the extent to which the UK public is 'Bregretful' about the outcome of the vote, which ended David Cameron 's time as prime minister. It found that 56 per cent want the UK to return to being part of the EU, while 61 per cent believe Brexit has been a failure. Of these, the overwhelming majority, more than eight out of ten, blame Boris Johnson and the Conservative Party, while more than two-thirds blame Nigel Farage. Mr Johnson was one of the most high-profile members of the 'Leave' campaign but he and others were accused of backing the idea with no plan for what Brexit would look like in practice. The UK's exit from the bloc is on course to cut UK trade by 15 per cent, the government's independent financial watchdog has warned, despite Vote Leave campaigners arguing it would receive a boost. Earlier this year, Labour ministers pledged to 'tear down' barriers to trade with the European Union after new figures showed Brexit has cost UK business £37bn a year. And The Independent revealed that Brexit had created a 'mind-blowing' two billion extra pieces of paperwork – enough to wrap around the world 15 times. The latest survey found 56 per cent of people also think it was wrong for Britain to vote to leave the EU. And almost two-thirds, 65 per cent, now want to see a closer relationship with the EU However, just 28 per cent of Tory voters and 16 per cent of voters for Mr Farage 's Reform UK want to rejoin the EU. It will be nine years since the landmark Brexit referendum vote next week. Sir Nick Harvey, CEO of the pro-EU group European Movement UK, said that since the UK left the EU 'the consequences for the British people have become increasingly stark. This latest polling not only reinforces that - it shows that more and more people see the benefits of much closer ties with the European Union. "Brexit has delivered a sustained and worsening blow to the UK economy, one that is especially pronounced for the small and medium-sized enterprises that form the backbone of our commercial and industrial landscape, who are living with the consequences every day. That has made us all poorer, depleted our economy and weakened our country with a thousand tiny cuts.' Matt Smith, from YouGov, said: 'When we asked what type of relationship with the EU people would support, most Britons said they want the UK to return to the EU (56 per cent ).... This does not include many of those who voted to leave it in the first place (24 per cent ) or Conservative (28 per cent ) or Reform UK voters (16 per cent ). 'Despite the support for 'Breturn', many people feel the government has more important matters to deal with. 44 per cent said attempting to re-join the EU would be the wrong priority right now, when balanced against the other issues the UK is facing, compared to 37 per cent who believe it would be the right priority. ' The survey asked 2,239 adults in Britain between June 16 and 17.
