Scotland's assisted dying law ‘unlikely to pass as 21 MSPs waver'
Scotland's assisted dying Bill is unlikely to become law, with more than 20 MSPs poised to drop their support, opponents say.
Last week, MSPs supported the principles of the Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill by 70 votes to 56, allowing it to clear its first parliamentary hurdle at Holyrood.
But some who who backed the legislation warned they would switch sides and oppose it unless changes were made to address major concerns.
Analysis published by Right for Life, a charity opposing the Bill, found that 21 MSPs were in this category of 'waverers'. They backed the Bill but could change their minds for the final vote.
Only seven would need to 'flip' for the legislation to be defeated if there were no defections the other way.
Waverers are said to include Russell Findlay, the Scottish Tory leader, Ross Greer of the Scottish Greens, Colin Smyth of Labour, and Shirley-Anne Somerville, the SNP's social justice secretary.
MSPs are now expected to table dozens of amendments to the Bill before the final vote on whether it should become law in the autumn or winter.
John Lamont, the Scottish Tory MP, said: 'Despite the public statements to the contrary, Tuesday's vote will feel like a setback for those in favour of assisted suicide north and south of the Border. There is all to play for and every reason to believe this dangerous Bill may still be prevented from becoming law.
'It was made clear during the debate and public statements beforehand that many MSPs have given this Bill only qualified support and voted for it simply so the debate can continue. Only a tiny number of MSPs need to flip to ensure it's defeated later in the Parliamentary process.'
Mr Lamont added: 'We've seen south of the border that a narrow passage at such an early stage means little when you get into the nitty-gritty of the Bill.'
Separate legislation introducing assisted dying in England and Wales has been tabled in the Commons by Kim Leadbeater, the Labour MP. Two previous attempts to change the law in Scotland were defeated at the first hurdle.
The latest Scottish Bill would give mentally competent people over 16 who have been diagnosed with a terminal condition the right to end their life.
Liam McArthur, the Liberal Democrat MSP who tabled the legislation, has since agreed that the lower age limit should be raised to 18.
Safeguards would include independent assessments by two doctors and a 14-day cooling off period. There would also be a requirement for those requesting an assisted death to have lived in Scotland for at least a year.
MSPs were given a free vote on Mr McArthur's Bill, meaning they could vote in line with their consciences and were not whipped by their parties.
Before the vote, an impassioned Holyrood debate heard widespread fears that the Bill did not include enough protections for vulnerable people, particularly the disabled, who might be coerced into ending their lives.
Opponents expressed concern that the Bill would be a 'slippery slope', with the number of people eligible for an assisted death increasing markedly over time.
They also said that the definition of terminal illness in the legislation was too broad, with no lifespan time limit, and that it covered conditions such as anorexia.
Mr Findlay said last week that he shared 'many of the reservations that have been expressed about the Bill, not least around the potential for coercion and the criteria being widened through later legal challenges'.
Mr McArthur said he would spend the coming months discussing with other MSPs 'whether there are amendments which would supplement the extensive safeguards in the bill'.
He said: 'Several of those who voted against the bill have also indicated to me that they are sympathetic to the principle and open to further discussions.
'I am optimistic and looking forward to sitting down with colleagues over the coming months to plan how we deliver the long overdue choice of an assisted death for terminally ill Scots who wish it.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
3 hours ago
- BBC News
LGBT veterans will not lose other benefits after compensation
Veterans due to receive payments from the LGBT Financial Recognition Scheme will not lose out on other benefits after a change to Scottish government has confirmed that 1,200 armed forces members who suffered under the ban on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) personnel have now applied to the UK government's payment ban was in place within the UK military from 1967 to 2000 and, after years of campaigning, the UK government announced the payments last December. Up to £75m has been set aside to acknowledge hurt and discrimination, with affected veterans able to receive awards of up to £70,000 each. Some veterans currently receive financial help, on a means-tested basis, through the council tax reduction scheme. But Finance Secretary Shona Robison said regulations would be now changed to ensure any compensation payments do not affect eligibility for Robison said: "As we mark 25 years since the lifting of the ban on LGBT people serving in the armed forces, it is important to recognise the hardship that so many faced, with widespread homophobic bullying and harassment."Nothing will make up for the difficulties that LGBT veterans faced, however, our action will ensure those in Scotland receive every penny that they are entitled to."Under the UK government scheme, those who were dismissed or discharged from the armed forces because of their sexual orientation or gender identity could receive £50, service personnel who suffered harassment, intrusive investigations or even imprisonment could receive further payments of up to £20,000. Peter Gibson, chief executive of Fighting with Pride, said the group had "campaigned for justice for LGBTQ+ veterans for many years, helping to secure reparations and financial recognition of their horrendous treatment prior to 2000".He added: "As we slowly see the UK government deal with those financial payments, protected from benefit and taxation impact, it is wonderful to see the Scottish government taking action to ensure other benefits such as council tax benefit is also protected too."We continue to seek out veterans who were discharged or dismissed from the military to support them, and this news is one more step towards helping those in Scotland."
The Independent
8 hours ago
- The Independent
What can Reform do to shift the idea it is the ‘Nigel Party'?
Labour breathed a huge sigh of relief after a surprise victory in the Scottish parliament by-election in Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse. Senior Scottish Labour figures had feared coming second or even third behind Reform UK; for once, it wasn't expectation management. Labour insiders admit privately the tight three-horse race confirms that Reform UK is on the map in Scotland, previously hostile territory for Nigel Farage. 'Something is up when you knock on doors in Scotland and get Reform talking points thrown at you,' one minister told me. Reform's advance will make Labour's task of ousting the SNP in next May's Scottish parliament elections much harder. After Keir Starmer's landslide last year, when Labour won 37 of Scotland's 57 seats, the party had high hopes of ending SNP rule north of the border after 19 years. But an unpopular government at Westminster has dragged Labour down; it has lost one in six of its 2024 Scottish voters to Farage's party. Reform is also on course to do well in next May's elections to the Welsh parliament, where Labour has called the shots since devolution in 1998. Although Reform had hoped to come at least second in Hamilton, it can still claim momentum in Scotland. A much bigger setback for Farage than its third place was the resignation of Zia Yusuf as party chair. After Reform's sweeping gains in last month's local elections in England and the Runcorn parliamentary by-election, Farage said: 'We would not have done […] what we did without him.' Now, Farage is dismissing Yusuf's claim to be responsible for Reform's meteoric rise. Tough game, politics. The energetic, telegenic Yusuf had made a good start in professionalising Reform – something Farage spectacularly failed to do as leader of Ukip and the Brexit Party. As a Muslim, Yusuf gave Reform cover against allegations of racism, but received nasty abuse on social media from some Reform supporters. Yusuf had plans to attract Muslim voters and that is why he was angered by Reform MP Sarah Pochin's call for a ban on the burqa. However, there were wider reasons for his departure. He felt sidelined after being put in charge of the Elon Musk-style Doge unit in councils run by Reform. The 38-year-old multi-millionaire entrepreneur didn't suffer fools gladly, and his abrasive style upset some at Reform's Millbank Tower headquarters (Labour's base when it won its 1997 landslide). He was blamed by critics for escalating the feud with former Reform MP Rupert Lowe. They complained that Yusuf was not a team player – a bit rich when that label applies to Farage in spades. The departure is a reminder of Farage's achilles heel: he falls out with senior figures in every party or campaign he is involved in. The loss of Yusuf will make it harder to make the Doge exercise work. This matters because the party needs to make its claim credible that vast savings can be made from cutting waste to be a contender for power. Crucially, Farage cannot be a one-man band – the 'Nigel Party', as it's dubbed at Westminster. He gives the impression of wanting to be the only tall poppy, but will need a cabinet-in-waiting to convince voters his party could run the country. However, other parties should not get carried away with Farage's woes. Voters are less bothered about Reform infighting than the Westminster village. Conservative claims that Reform is imploding are wishful thinking, and their humiliating fourth place in Hamilton illustrates their dire position. Reform remains a real threat to Keir Starmer's hopes of a second term. Labour is banking on turning the next election into a presidential contest between Starmer and Farage. Labour insiders call it a 'nosepeg' strategy: they hope left-of-centre voters who have given up on Labour after its poor first year will hold their nose and back Starmer to keep Farage out rather than defect to the Liberal Democrats, Greens or independents. Labour plans a parallel move in Scotland: 'Vote Farage, get SNP.' As my colleague John Rentoul noted, Labour should attack Farage for his 'fantasy economics' rather than being a 'privately-educated stockbroker'. Polling by More in Common shows that voters believe Starmer had a more privileged upbringing than Farage, and believe the Reform leader speaks more for the working class than the prime minister. Starmer allies insist the lesson has been learnt. Starmer's welcome moves to tackle child poverty and his U-turn on the winter fuel allowance suggest he realises he must also make a positive appeal to left-of-centre voters and not merely ape Reform with tough language on immigration, which such voters don't like. But he will need to go further, with an economic reset including tax rises, to pay for his new social justice commitments and avoid the impression that Wednesday's spending review will mean 'austerity 2.0'. Labour's approach has dangers: in attacking Farage head-on, some Labour MPs worry, the party risks amplifying his message and building him up further. There are no easy roads to a second Labour term.
Daily Mail
16 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Booze, wood-burners, Sunday roasts... as the list of everyday pleasures targeted by the SNP grows longer, have we EVER been subjected to a more censorious nanny state government?
They've clobbered smokers. Thought – aloud – about criminalising the ownership of cats. Its Fife panjandrums are now leaning on local chippies to slash portion-sizes – in the averred interests of public health: now, SNP surrogates threaten your Sunday roast. The ink had barely dried on the first Scottish Parliament minutes before that first cohort of MSPs had banned fox-hunting and hare-coursing. Passed a whole Act about dog-fouling. Our underemployed, overwaged legislators are still after anyone gasping for a fag - in the latest wheeze, you can now be prosecuted for puffing within fifteen metres of a hospital boundary, even if you are on the other side of the street. Disposable vapes are in their sights too: for years it has been an offence to vape at any Scottish railway station, even on a platform in the open air. No pleasure seems safe from the Nats, from their fatuous efforts to police football chants – indeed, the initial law was so intrusive, and so unworkable, it had to be abandoned. Forget that soothing drink, by the way. 'Minimum pricing,' whacked up again last year, means you're now shelling out more for a litre of sherry than, back in 1999, you had to hand over for a bottle of Famous Grouse. Our English neighbours enjoy cheaper beer than we do. And now the Nats have a real new beef with us. The Scottish Government's Climate Change Committee, wagging a sententious finger, says we should all be eating 30 per cent less red meat. And that farmers – as if they did not have trials enough, with scant profit-margins and over-weening bureaucracy in one of Scotland's loneliest jobs – should rear a third fewer sheep and cattle. Even that shocker has had to jostle for attention with other ridiculous headlines. NHS Fife, for instance, is leaning on the hot takeaway trade to cut the typical portion of, for instance, fish and chips. And the Scottish Animal Welfare Commission suddenly has anglers in its crosshairs. Fishing practices should be reformed, it drones, as fish are 'sentient beings' with 'emotional experiences that matter to them.' It hopes ministers will soon review the law regarding 'actions that occur in the normal course of fishing.' Such a move, panted one newspaper and as if it had just unmasked Lord Lucan, 'could outlaw many aspects of angling such as hooking a fish and removing it from the water.' SAWC does, admittedly, have form. Only in February, it thought about forbidding cat ownership in parts of the country where there was demonstrable predation on birds and small mammals. It would make still more sense to shoot every last bird of prey out of the sky and, if SAWC wants a rough guide, between 1837 and 1840 gamekeepers in forested Invergarry killed 285 common buzzards, 63 goshawks, 27 white-tailed sea eagles, 15 golden eagles and 18 ospreys. Not to mention six gyrfalcons, eleven hobbies, 275 kites, 371 rough-legged buzzards, 462 kes-trels, 78 merlins, 63 hen harriers and seven orange-legged falcons. The First Minister, of less stern stuff, limply assured the public that the SNP administration had no plans to ban pet cats. Last year, too, the Nationalists were even forced to abandon a crazed scheme to ban wood-burning stoves in new-build houses. It feels increasingly as if you cannot take three strides in what one of John Swinney's predecessors once hailed as 'the best small country in the world' without being lectured, harangued, re-proached and disapproved of. Tobacco, sugar, booze, salmon or that jumbo-sausage supper… ministers have their beady little eyes on us. And, no doubt, others have eyes on them too. It is only fair to point out that this culture of censure, rebuke and righteously rapped knuckles long predates the SNP's 2007 ascent to power. From practically the start, the devolved new Scotland rapidly won much wry comment for eat-your-vegetables nanny statism. After the first MSPs had solemnly voted themselves a com-memorative medal. In 2005, for instance, Nora Radcliffe – Liberal Democrat MSP for Gordon, till Alex Salmond toppled her from obscurity into oblivion – called for a ban on the boiling of live lobsters. The Scottish Executive, as it then was, pelted us with posters and raucous TV ads about the horrors of everything from eating too many crisps, through dodgy electric blankets, to the enormity of consigning your Christmas turkey to the fridge before it was completely cold. And, in April 2006 and to widespread trepidation – many journalists hurried up from England, hoping for riots on the streets – Jack McConnell's administration banned smoking in enclosed public spaces. A policy, in fact, first suggested by a Nationalist MSP, Stewart Maxwell. But Scots submitted to it so meekly that one wonders how much it emboldened another First Minister, fourteen years later, to impose all sorts of ridiculous restrictions on our liberties during Covid. At its height, you could not sit down on a park bench, enjoy coffee with a neighbour in your garden or leave your house more than once a day. It was even decreed an offence to venture beyond the bounds of your own local authority. When I in March 2021 had briefly to scamper back to my Hebridean lair, by deserted roads through silent towns, for an armful of Astra-Zeneca, I was so terrified of being stopped and challenged I carried a sort of letter-of-transit from my GP. Meanwhile, our unfortunate children shuffled down school corridors in sweaty masks as – concerned about classroom ventilation – ministers wondered aloud about sawing the bottoms off doors and Nicola Sturgeon tut-tutted that Prince William dared to visit Scotland. Behind this are two dark realities. The first is that, while finally responsible for a host of public services, the Scottish Government (and, by extension, the Scottish Parliament) delivers virtually none of them. Local authorities school most of our children; local health-boards direct primary care and hospitals, and so on. When it finally did have an immediate and grave responsibility, from the dawn of 2021 – vaccinating the elderly and the vulnerable against coronavirus – the Scottish Government made such a laboured fist of things that, quietly and with the deepest tact, Whitehall sent in the army. The second reality is that there is a very old middle-class tradition in Scotland of censuring working-class pleasures. In an era when, for most ordinary people, Sunday was their only day off, clergy insisted on the shuttering of galleries and museums. In a noted Court of Session case – with consequences, generations later, for the Western Isles – it was finally ruled that the good and respectable folk of Burntisland, most conscious of their goodness and respectability, could not ban the Sabbath visits of excursion steamers. In 1875 the Religion and Morals Report for the Free Church General Assembly railed that, to a large extent, 'our farm servants are ignorant, licentious, profane and rude'. What yokels might have thought of Free Church ministers is not recorded. Meanwhile, Presbyterians grew so obsessed with the demon drink that, by the Great War, many congregations celebrated Communion with non-alcoholic wine. And, in 1907, a United Free Church minister assailed a new social phenomenon as 'perfect iniquities of Hell itself,' capped in Glasgow Corporation's 1909 roar about 'the great and increasing evil' it was doing to the city's young men and women. Business ventures 'owned by 'aliens and Roman Catholics,' touting an unnecessary product 'epitomising,' gasped one gentleman, 'the evil of luxury being smuggled into the souls of Glaswegians.' The target of such ire? Italian ice cream cafés. As if not to be outdone, the Free Presbyterian Magazine warned young Highland lasses, seeking urban employment, of the perils of the white-slave trade. They should not, for instance, accept sweets from strangers. Retreating from such past larks to the latest decrees from those with the rule over us, it is striking how few stand up to logical examination. Take the Scottish Climate Committee's clamour for less beef and fewer cows; the reduced bleating of sheep. This is presumably pegged to three core tenets of tree-hugging faith: that reduced upland grazing will in scant decades see the regeneration of much Scottish forest; that cattle-feed is a wildly inefficient use of grain; and that cows, naturally flatulent, are responsible for about 14.5 per cent of global greenhouse gases. The precise figure is, in fact, disputed. But the Committee's lordly loftiness flies in the face of basic realities. For one, about 65 per cent of all the land in Britain can bear nothing but grass. Cows and sheep – hold the front page – eat grass. We cannot. Our cloven-hooved stock will, accordingly, be an essential part of our food economy till the end of time, and the beef industry in particular has for years been working hard to reduce its carbon footprint. For another, much of upland and coastal Scotland is too high – or too exposed to salted winds – to bear significant woodland. Life in somewhere like Lewis or Tiree is, as someone once said with feeling, like living on the deck of an aircraft-carrier. Snow can fall on Ben Nevis in any calendar month of the year. And, even were it otherwise, the Climate Change Committee seems to be blithely unaware of the real menace: deer. The deer population on Britain, as Patrick Galbraith details in his rather good book about Brit-ain's vanishing birds - In Search of One Last Song - is completely out of control: two million beasts on the trot, the highest in a thousand years. The ideal on a well-managed Scottish estate is five deer per square kilometre – on some, numbers are at an unsustainable twenty per kilometre. The depredations of muntjac alone have wiped out the nightingale in many parts of England. Deer threaten the survival, too, of black grouse, ptarmigan and the capercaillie. They are, additionally, responsible for many fatal road-accidents; and there is no more ferocious foe of forest than browsing Bambi. But households remain reluctant to buy and cook venison – and, absurdly, much of the venison for sale in Britain today is imported. In any event, most of us eat less red meat these days, not least because it is so expensive: you will struggle to buy a family-sized pot-roasting cut for less than a tenner. And in the Hebrides, well within living memory, it was a rare treat: fish and potatoes all week, with meat (and the related broth as the first course) on Sundays. There are other environmental realities that seem to have eluded the Climate Change Committee. Without cattle, as the Royal Agricultural Society of England has pointed out, 'there would be no dung, which would vastly reduce the presence of dung beetles in their habitat. 'As well as delivering a myriad of ecosystem benefits, such as sequestering carbon into the soil, dung beetle larvae are a key food source for ground-nesting birds. It is estimated that dung beetles save farmers in the UK £367 million per year…' Then we have that NHS Fife obsession: how big is your fish supper? In fact, fish and chips – cooked properly and well – is a remarkably healthy meal. There is, for instance, no added sugar. It is rich in Omega-3 fatty acids, vitamins B12 and D, and high-quality protein – and less fat than a typical serving of, say, chicken tikka masala or an oil-slicked Chinese takeaway. 'Typically,' assures one authority, 'fish and chips on average have 9.42 grams of fat per 100 grams, while the average pizza has 11, chicken korma 15.5 and a donner kebab a whopping 16.2…' We come to SWAC's vapourings about angling. One rather doubts such solicitude extends to every creature of the earth. Even the Commission's august personages doubtless prefer life without headlice, tapeworms and rats and most, presumably, vaccinate their children. It remains official NatureScot advice to smash dead any American signal crayfish you meet in our fresh waters and, for over two decades, it has been determinedly exterminating feral mink in the Western Isles. Where SWAC may have a point is the dubious practice of 'catch and release.' My own view is that you should only venture out with the rod for fish you can eat and, having caught your salmon and thumped it on the head, you head for home and the deep freeze, rather than hauling in fish after fish, weighing them, measuring them, taking a few snaps for social media and then returning them to the deep. Not forgetting a protracted chat about emotional experiences that really mattered to them. But, in coarse fishing, catch and release is the whole point: we might, perhaps, command barbless hooks, or even the soluble sort decreed in the pursuit of bluefin tuna. The wild Atlantic salmon may not always be with us; the typical Scottish political animal will add to the gaiety of nations for decades to come. Bossy, virtue-signalling, carefully picking its targets, and unconsciously living what Ronald Reagan once mocked as the prevalent tenets in modern statecraft. If it moves, tax it; if it keeps moving, regulate it – and, if it stops moving, subsidise it.
