
MPs to discuss ban on assisted dying adverts as Bill returns to Parliament
The regulation of substances to be used by a terminally ill person to bring about their death is also due to be discussed by MPs in the Commons on Friday.
The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill is undergoing a second day of report stage, with various amendments likely to be debated and possibly voted on.
Its third reading – where a vote is taken on the overall Bill – could take place next Friday.
The Bill passed second reading stage by a majority of 55 during a historic vote in November, which saw MPs support the principle of assisted dying.
Various reports have indicated some MPs who voted in favour last year could withdraw their support amid concerns around safeguards and how much scrutiny the proposed legislation has received, while others might switch to supporting a Bill that backers argue has been strengthened over time.
Opinion in the medical community has been divided, with the Royal College of Physicians (RCP) and Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych) expressing concern, but some MPs who are doctors are among the Bill's strongest supporters.
Seven RCPsych members, including a former president and vice president, have written to MPs to distance themselves from their college's concern, instead describing the current Bill as 'workable, safe and compassionate' with a 'clear and transparent legal framework'.
Meanwhile, the Children's Commissioner for England has repeated her call for children's voices to be heard in the conversation.
Dame Rachel de Souza said: 'Children's views have at best been side-lined, at worst written off entirely simply because they would not fall within the scope of the current scope of legislation.
'They have spoken passionately about their worries that this Bill could be extended further. We need only to look to other models, such as Canada, where proposals for assisted death to be expanded to 'mature minors' – children – are a live issue, to understand the source of their concern.
'This Bill has raised the level of debate on important and challenging subjects in England – but children have raised very real concerns with me about their opportunity to shape this legislation, which could impact them as they reach adulthood, or impact them in indirect ways through the deaths of loved ones.'
Demonstrators are once again expected to gather outside Parliament to make their views known on the Bill.
Disability campaigner George Fielding, representing campaign group Not Dead Yet UK, argued the Bill 'risks state-sanctioned suicide'.
He added: 'It risks making people feel like a burden while ignoring the social, economic and systemic pressures that deny people the treatment and dignity they need to live.
'This is not choice. This is coercion, masquerading as compassion.'
But Claire Macdonald, director of My Death, My Decision, which is in favour of assisted dying, said the public mood is clear that change is needed.
She said: 'We hope MPs strike the careful balance between creating a law that is strong and safe, with a system that works for dying people, giving them choice and compassion at the end of life.
'What is clear is that no-one should be forced to suffer, and the British public wants politicians to change the law on assisted dying.'
In a letter to MPs this week, Labour's Kim Leadbeater, the parliamentarian behind the Bill, said supporters and opponents appear in agreement that 'if we are to pass this legislation it should be the best and safest Bill possible'.
She added: 'I'm confident it can and will be.'
Among the amendments to the Bill expected to be discussed on Friday are a ban on advertising an assisted dying service were the law to change, with Ms Leadbeater previously saying it 'would feel inappropriate for this to be something which was advertised'.
But Bill opponent Labour MP Paul Waugh warned of 'unspecified exceptions, which could make the ban itself worthless', adding that he had put forward a tighter amendment to 'strengthen the Bill on this issue and to better protect the vulnerable'.
Ms Leadbeater said other possible amendments include ensuring 'any approved substance used for assisted dying is subject to robust regulation and scrutiny', which she said is 'essential for clinical safety, public confidence and ethical integrity'.
Earlier this week, a group of charities wrote to MPs to express 'serious concerns' about what they described as an 'anorexia loophole', arguing people with eating disorders could end up qualifying for assisted dying because of the physical consequences of their illness.
However, an amendment preventing a person meeting the requirements for an assisted death 'solely as a result of voluntarily stopping eating or drinking' – tabled by Labour's Naz Shah – was accepted by Ms Leadbeater without a vote last month.
Ms Leadbeater said this, combined with existing safeguards in the Bill, would rule out people with anorexia falling into its scope.
As it stands, 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, subject to approval by two doctors and a panel featuring a social worker, senior legal figure and psychiatrist.
MPs are entitled to have a free vote on the Bill and any amendments, meaning they vote according to their conscience rather than along party lines.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


North Wales Chronicle
2 hours ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Ban on advertising and safeguard for child patients added to Assisted Dying Bill
The new parts to the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill were voted in on Friday as a second day of debate on various amendments came to a close. It is expected the next major vote on the overall Bill could take place next Friday, which could see it either fall or pass through to the Lords. Impassioned debate heard the Bill described by Conservative MP Kieran Mullan as a 'deeply consequential and highly contentious piece of legislation for our society'. He argued not enough time has been allocated for debate on such a divisive issue, but health minister Stephen Kinnock said there had been more than 90 hours of parliamentary time spent so far, and more than 500 amendments had been considered at committee stage earlier this year. On Friday a majority of MPs approve a new clause, tabled by Labour MP Dame Meg Hillier, to ensure medics cannot raise the topic of assisted dying with under-18s. Her separate amendment to prevent health workers from bringing up the issue with adults patients before they have raised it was voted down. The amendment on child patients was hailed as a 'first major Commons defeat' by opposition campaigners Care Not Killing which welcomed 'MPs removing the ability of doctors to raise unprompted assisted suicide with children'. A group of Labour MPs opposed to the proposed legislation called it an '11th hour rejection of the claims made about the safety of this Bill' which 'proves that confidence is slipping away from it'. They also cautioned that MPs might not have a copy of the final Bill by the time they vote 'on this life and death issue' next week, as some outstanding amendments will still be being considered on Friday morning. A ban on advertising assisted dying should the Bill pass into law has also been approved. An amendment, by fellow Labour MP Paul Waugh, to limit exceptions on that ban did not pass. He said the ban as it stands has 'unspecified exceptions, which could make the ban itself worthless', warning online harms from ads about assisted dying on TikTok 'could be a reality without the tighter safeguards in my amendment'. A number of other amendments were passed, including a provision for assisted dying deaths to not automatically be referred to a coroner and around the regulation of substances for use in assisted dying. Other issues debated included an amendment requiring the Health Secretary to publish an assessment of the availability, quality and distribution of palliative and end-of-life care one year after the Bill passing into law. Pledging her support for the amendment, which was tabled by Liberal Democrat Munira Wilson, Kim Leadbeater said MPs should not have to choose between supporting assisted dying or palliative care as it is not an 'either/or' conversation for dying people. She said palliative care and assisted dying 'can and do work side by side to give terminally-ill patients the care and choice they deserve in their final days', and urged MPs to support 'all options available to terminally ill people'. Ms Wilson's amendment is supported by Marie Curie, which said it is 'desperately needed as the end-of-life care system is in crisis, with huge gaps in services and a lack of NHS leadership on this vital part of our health and care system'. It is expected that amendment could be voted on next Friday. One MP, who became emotional as she recalled the death of her husband who she said had been 'in extreme pain' with terminal cancer, urged her colleagues to 'mind our language' after words like 'murder' were used. Liberal Democrat MP Caroline Voaden, whose husband died of oesophageal cancer, said it is 'so wrong' to use such language. She said: 'This is about helping people die in a civilised way and helping their families not go through a horrendous experience of watching a loved one die in agony.' The beginning of Friday's session saw MPs add a new opt-out clause to the Bill. The amendment, meaning no person including all health and social care professionals, can be obliged to take part in assisted dying had been debated and approved last month, but has now been formally added to the Bill. The Bill passed second reading stage by a majority of 55 during a historic vote in November which saw MPs support the principle of assisted dying. Demonstrators both for and against a change in the law once again gathered outside Parliament to make their views known on the Bill. Sarah Wootton, chief executive of Dignity in Dying which is in favour of a change in the law, said: 'Our country is closer than ever before to the safe, compassionate, and tightly regulated assisted dying law that so many people want, from all walks of life and every part of the country.' But former MP Caroline Ansell, from Christian Action Research and Education (Care), which opposes assisted dying, urged parliamentarians to vote against the Bill. She said: 'It is irredeemably flawed in principle and in detail. Parliament should close the door to assisted suicide and focus on truly compassionate and life-affirming forms of support.' As it stands, 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, subject to approval by two doctors and a panel featuring a social worker, senior legal figure and psychiatrist. MPs are entitled to have a free vote on the Bill and any amendments, meaning they vote according to their conscience rather than along party lines.


North Wales Chronicle
2 hours ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Corbyn says police ‘picked on him to silence democratic rights' as case dropped
The former Labour leader and John McDonnell were called for interview after a pro-Palestine protest in London earlier this year. Mr McDonnell revealed in the Commons that police had dropped their investigation into the pair, but said the Metropolitan Police had originally tried to charge them because MPs were held to have 'a greater culpability'. Nine people face no further action after a demonstration on January 18, according to the Met, which has told the PA news agency it will not confirm whether either politician was involved. Raising a point of order, Mr McDonnell told the Commons: 'You may be aware that (Mr Corbyn) and I were called for interview by the Metropolitan Police following our participation in a demonstration in January calling for peace and justice for the Palestinian people and an end to the genocide in Gaza. 'It was alleged that we failed to follow police restrictions on the protest. This is untrue, and at all times we followed police instructions. 'We can now report that the police have dropped the case against us and there will be no charges.' Mr McDonnell alleged that 'the Metropolitan Police informed us that our case was referred to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) because as MPs we were to be held to have, and I quote, 'a greater culpability'.' The independent MP for Hayes and Harlington, who was once Mr Corbyn's shadow chancellor, added: 'This is an unacceptable practice which flies in the face of the principle that we are all equal before the law.' Mr Corbyn, now the independent MP for Islington North, said: 'I don't intend to let it rest just there.' He told MPs: 'If there are elements in the police and possibly in the Crown Prosecution Service who want Members of Parliament to be held to a different standard of account than the general public, that removes us from the normality of law in this country. 'And I think that would be a very, very bad step indeed.' He later added: 'We have to all – all of us – have the right to take part in public protest about human rights abuse, about war, about peace, about anything else. That is what democracy is about. 'And I saw this whole effort as being a means to try and silence the democratic rights of everybody in our society by picking on us two as Members of Parliament, and I'm grateful for the decision that's been made today.' Father of the House Sir Edward Leigh said he had 'not often taken part in demos in central London' but spoke to 'show that opinion in this House of Commons is absolutely united'. 'We've always proclaimed what is very much the British way that Members of Parliament are no different from any other member of the public,' the Conservative MP for Gainsborough said. 'If they do wrong, they will be held to account, but they should not be subject to some greater test of culpability just because they're Members of Parliament.' A Met Police spokesperson said: 'No further action will be taken against nine people who were interviewed as part of an investigation into alleged breaches of Public Order Act conditions during a protest on Saturday January 18. 'The decision in two cases was taken following a review of the evidence by the Crown Prosecution Service, while the remaining seven cases were decided on by police officers. 'While we are aware of names being attributed to those who were the subject of our investigation, we will not be confirming their identities given that matters did not result in any charges.' Two individuals have been charged with breaching the same conditions as well as inciting others to do so, according to the force, with a further two individuals still under investigation.

Leader Live
2 hours ago
- Leader Live
Corbyn says police ‘picked on him to silence democratic rights' as case dropped
The former Labour leader and John McDonnell were called for interview after a pro-Palestine protest in London earlier this year. Mr McDonnell revealed in the Commons that police had dropped their investigation into the pair, but said the Metropolitan Police had originally tried to charge them because MPs were held to have 'a greater culpability'. Nine people face no further action after a demonstration on January 18, according to the Met, which has told the PA news agency it will not confirm whether either politician was involved. Raising a point of order, Mr McDonnell told the Commons: 'You may be aware that (Mr Corbyn) and I were called for interview by the Metropolitan Police following our participation in a demonstration in January calling for peace and justice for the Palestinian people and an end to the genocide in Gaza. 'It was alleged that we failed to follow police restrictions on the protest. This is untrue, and at all times we followed police instructions. 'We can now report that the police have dropped the case against us and there will be no charges.' Mr McDonnell alleged that 'the Metropolitan Police informed us that our case was referred to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) because as MPs we were to be held to have, and I quote, 'a greater culpability'.' The independent MP for Hayes and Harlington, who was once Mr Corbyn's shadow chancellor, added: 'This is an unacceptable practice which flies in the face of the principle that we are all equal before the law.' Mr Corbyn, now the independent MP for Islington North, said: 'I don't intend to let it rest just there.' He told MPs: 'If there are elements in the police and possibly in the Crown Prosecution Service who want Members of Parliament to be held to a different standard of account than the general public, that removes us from the normality of law in this country. 'And I think that would be a very, very bad step indeed.' He later added: 'We have to all – all of us – have the right to take part in public protest about human rights abuse, about war, about peace, about anything else. That is what democracy is about. 'And I saw this whole effort as being a means to try and silence the democratic rights of everybody in our society by picking on us two as Members of Parliament, and I'm grateful for the decision that's been made today.' Father of the House Sir Edward Leigh said he had 'not often taken part in demos in central London' but spoke to 'show that opinion in this House of Commons is absolutely united'. 'We've always proclaimed what is very much the British way that Members of Parliament are no different from any other member of the public,' the Conservative MP for Gainsborough said. 'If they do wrong, they will be held to account, but they should not be subject to some greater test of culpability just because they're Members of Parliament.' A Met Police spokesperson said: 'No further action will be taken against nine people who were interviewed as part of an investigation into alleged breaches of Public Order Act conditions during a protest on Saturday January 18. 'The decision in two cases was taken following a review of the evidence by the Crown Prosecution Service, while the remaining seven cases were decided on by police officers. 'While we are aware of names being attributed to those who were the subject of our investigation, we will not be confirming their identities given that matters did not result in any charges.' Two individuals have been charged with breaching the same conditions as well as inciting others to do so, according to the force, with a further two individuals still under investigation.