Assisted dying puts price on my head, says disabled peer Lord Kevin Shinkwin as he speaks out against the bill
A DISABLED peer said he fears he would not be alive today if assisted dying was already legal.
Lord Kevin Shinkwin said the Terminally Ill Adults Bill 'puts a price on my head' and he would have felt pressure to agree to having a lethal injection over fear of being a burden.
1
The Tory's warning comes as campaigners vow to fight the assisted dying bill in the Lords after MPs narrowly backed it by just 23 votes on Friday.
Lord Shinkwin, 54, is a disability rights campaigner who has a severe form of brittle bone disease.
He said: 'I am a disabled person. I cost the NHS, over the course of my lifetime, probably several million pounds to keep me alive.
'This Bill would put a price on my head — on the head of so many disabled people.'
Asked if he feared he would not be alive today if the assisted dying law was in force, Lord Shinkwin said: 'I think you have hit the nail on the head.
"Absolutely. I was in intensive care a few months ago, and had a doctor come over to me when I was extremely vulnerable and said, 'Have you considered assisted dying?', I would have felt under real pressure to do that.'
Lord Shinkwin said he and other peers will now amend the Bill so it has greater safeguards.
As it is a private member's Bill and not a government initiative, some peers are vowing to try to block it altogether.
ASSISTED DYING VOTE
What Happens Next?
- With the Commons backing the Bill, it now moves to the House of Lords for detailed debate and scrutiny.
- Peers can suggest amendments, which would send the Bill back to the Commons — a process known as 'ping pong'.
- But because this is a major conscience issue, the unelected Lords are unlikely to block it outright after it passed the elected House.
- Supporters hope it will win final approval and receive Royal Assent by October, officially becoming law.
- A four-year implementation period will follow, allowing time to establish the new system, including expert panels and regulatory safeguards.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
21 minutes ago
- Times
Sunday Times letters: Restoring public confidence in the NHS
Write to letters@ Shaun Lintern ('An extra £29bn a year to spend, but it's public trust that NHS bosses fear squandering', politics, Jun 15) is right to point out that the public is losing patience with the NHS but he omits to mention that there is still widespread support for the principles of tax funding and universal coverage on which the NHS is based. Restoring public confidence must involve progress in improving patients' access to care and in preventing illness. The government's mission concerning the NHS included improving healthy life expectancy for all and reducing the gap in healthy life expectancy between the English regions. The ten-year NHS plan, which is due to be published soon, must set out the measures that will be taken to implement this mission through action on the wider determinants of health and in the NHS Sir Chris HamChief executive of the King's Fund 2010-18; Solihull, W Midlands Further to your report, the National Health Service, which was founded in the year I was born, has become an outdated concept. The arrogance of NHS and political leaders of all persuasions in failing to embrace or even investigate other countries' health services over the years has led to a failure in cancer care, mental health care and palliative care, as well as an inability to cut waiting times for surgery and improve access to A&E and GP services. France, Canada and other nations run their health services so much better than we do, using hybrid models in which everyone enjoys the benefits. The question is whether Wes Streeting and the present NHS honchos can admit past errors in policy and get their act together. There is more at stake than public Derek Pettit (ret'd)Newnham on Severn, Glos I am mystified why politicians keep saying that workers in the NHS need to be 'more productive'. Staff already go above and beyond what they are paid for in terms of the hours worked and the care given, to compensate for an inadequately sized workforce. There is no point in providing more community facilities for medical investigations if there is nobody to staff them. Remember the staffing struggles at the Nightingale hospitals set up during the pandemic? I was born in the same year as the NHS and, having worked in it, was a long-time supporter of the organisation. Now, like many elderly friends, I have a deep dread of having to go to A&E and perhaps waiting days on a trolley for treatment or HoffState registered nurse (ret'd), London E14 Your report on the chancellor's spending plans is yet another insight into the Labour mindset ('Praying for something to turn up', politics, Jun 15). The ten-year plan to 'plough £750 billion into infrastructure' will include the launch of a website featuring details of the government's 'pipeline of the projects' plus a new industrial strategy to include energy subsidies for manufacturing companies. That's all well and good but others might suggest that, while the nation is hugely in debt, the best policy would be one focusing on consolidation. With the economy on its knees, productivity at its lowest ebb and unemployment at 4.6 per cent — not forgetting the colossal sums suggested for the defence review and the sizeable costs of the spending review — Labour's 'pipeline of the projects' seems more like a 'programme of the vanities'.Alastair ConanCoulsdon, Surrey We should not be wasting taxpayers' money on charging points for electric vehicles because government grants are merely leading councils to rush into installing low-powered chargers instead of providing the infrastructure that drivers need ('Supercharge EVs to drive Britain's car industry out of the doldrums', business, Jun 15). It is fortunate that the private EV charging industry has committed £6 billion to installing public charging. A privately funded rollout would be quicker and more efficient. We know which areas need charging and exactly where to put them. We don't need the government to use taxpayers' money: we simply need it to streamline planning rules and grid connections so we can handle it ourselves. A quicker rollout would not only improve public confidence in electric vehicles but would also create jobs, skills and opportunities. At a time when the government is obsessed with 'growth', it is surprising that it hasn't grasped the EV opportunity with both GhafoorChief Executive, Anthony Horowitz's admission that he dislikes being called Grandpa (Jun 15) led my wife and me to realise we're not alone. We decided our four grandchildren should call us 'Crisp' and 'Jelly'. It's easier for the children and fun for and Jenny ChapmanMendlesham Green, Suffolk I had no problem with being called Grandad but, after a discussion with my granddaughter about rap artists, I am now happy to be known as ForwardRedditch, Worcs Bill Jones outlined a fair way to manage illegal migrants arriving on our shores (letter, Jun 15). The welfare state has been stretched far beyond its limits. In building modern Singapore, the political genius Lee Kuan Yew said his priority was to build a 'fair, not welfare, society', while he thought our welfare state was the root of Britain's malaise. Few would ReidWoodford, Lancs Dianne and Charlie Hubbert, who have fostered more than 50 children, are an inspiration (magazine, Jun 15). Their story was heartwarming, uplifting and made me cry, but for all the right BrennanBolton Your report on gig prices struck a chord ('Hot tickets: are we being ripped off?', culture, Jun 15). A friend and I recently tried to book tickets to see Johnny Marr in Southampton. We called at the specified release time — to be told a minute or so later that the show had sold out. Soon after, £40 tickets for the show were being offered for more than £1,000 each on a resale site. In Europe, tickets are cheaper and more easily available to fans rather than being snapped up by bots and touts. If venues really want to keep live music alive, they need to revert to selling direct to fans, including via record stores and ticket Ladd-JonesSwanmore, Hants Finally parental burnout is 'a thing' ('Don't be ashamed if you're sick of your little darlings', news, Jun 15). For years I assumed I was the only mother who dreaded weekends and holidays as I didn't have the patience required to be both nurturing and entertaining for hours on end. Sometimes I'd hope for rain so instead of taking them to the park I could close my eyes on the sofa while they made a den out of chairs and sheets. Striving for perfection helps no one, least of all children, and merely provokes self-loathing. My children are now 26 and 27, with fond memories of being urged to watch yet another Thomas the Tank Engine video so that their father and I could take a CalmanLondon SE21 Dominic Lawson's article 'Putin's sway over the US is worse than you think' (Jun 15) prompted me to look at the way Vladimir Putin took over the Russian Federation. In the early days of his rule he ensured he had all the 'dirt' on his victims before toppling them. Perhaps this is the case with President Trump, whom Putin appears to disdain but who is the right man in the right place to help Putin to save his own ServaesHambledon, Surrey It is no surprise that UK chief executives are falling behind their US counterparts when half of the UK's productivity gap with the US is down to poor management capabilities ('The recipe for a great British CEO', books, Jun 15). As an American who has lived in the UK for three decades, I have seen how seriously the US takes management: investing in business schools, training chief executives in people leadership and strategy and valuing management experience. In the UK we still live with the David Brent effect, treating middle managers as punchlines instead of vital leaders. Unsurprisingly, 82 per cent of managers are given the role with no formal training. We ought not to write off our chief executives but instead train FranckeCEO, Chartered Management Institute Perhaps Professor Elizabeth Whittaker should 'employ' old people like me (I am 89) to tell parents who are scared to inoculate their children how awful childhood diseases can be ('The antivax whisperer winning the wary round to the jab', news, Jun 15). In 1942, aged six, I contracted measles. A sturdy child, I recovered fairly quickly, but my sister, aged three, was desperately ill and lost the sight in one eye. In 1965, our daughters also contracted measles and were both very ill. To our great relief, by the time our third daughter was born the measles vaccine was available. My grandmother had 13 children; six died of childhood illnesses. So much has been achieved since then. We must not let it be thrown away because of HartWatford I loved Matt Rudd's article on artificial fragrances and his weekly shopping woes (magazine, Jun 15). I, too, bought coconut-scented loo rolls by mistake. Looking on the bright side, at least my bathroom smells like a tropical MacLeanCheltenham Send your letter to: letters@ Please include an address for publication and a phone number in case of any queries. Letters should be received by midday on the Thursday before publication.
Times
21 minutes ago
- Times
‘No Carbon' Carney has left us high and dry
A bit like a sort of unreliable boyfriend. This, rather brilliantly, was the description of the record of the governor of the Bank of England, Mark Carney, by the Labour MP Pat McFadden, then a member of the Treasury select committee. That was in 2014, when the handsome Canadian, hailed as the 'George Clooney of central banking', was just a year into his tenure. McFadden was not talking about Carney's personal life: it was a metaphor for his policy of interest rate 'forward guidance', which was proving no sort of guidance at all. It was all over the place. In one respect, however, there was complete consistency in Carney's record over seven years as this country's most powerful unelected figure. He determinedly used his position to push Britain's banks into defunding the oil and gas industry, on the grounds that man-made climate change was of primary importance, and that financial institutions should base their investment decisions on the proposition that 80 per cent of the planet's hydrocarbon reserves were 'un-burnable'. His wise predecessor, Mervyn King, questioned the decision to make fighting climate change part of the Bank of England's remit, arguing that it made 'absolutely no sense' to add 'net zero' to its responsibilities, and that the Bank should stick to its knitting (interest rates and price stability) and leave environmental policies to the politicians. However, after leaving the Bank in 2020, Carney stuck to his mission. Under the auspices of the UN, he set up the Net Zero Banking Alliance, co-opting a large number of the world's biggest banks, representing $74 trillion in assets, into basing their lending on the mission to achieve 'net zero by 2050'. This, combined with the Labour government's policies under Ed Miliband, has meant that, as one British oil company executive put it to me, 'Not a single UK bank will lend to the North Sea industry'. The Net Zero Banking Alliance, more recently, has suffered an exodus of its American members, which have fallen in line with Donald Trump's agenda (summarised as 'Drill, baby, drill'). But surely, now that Carney has at last achieved his ambition of becoming Canadian prime minister, he is using all the power of that position to fight the good fight. Er, no. One reason Carney actually won the recent election was that he pledged to scrap the 'carbon tax' implemented by Justin Trudeau, for which he had previously proselytised. In office Carney has kept that promise — and in recent weeks gone much further in the opposite direction to everything he did when Bank of England governor. He appointed as energy minister a man who was an executive of an oil exploration and production company in Alberta, the heart of Canada's vast hydrocarbon reserves. These are known as the Alberta oil sands, covering an area the size of England and described some years ago by National Geographic (not a fan) as 'the world's largest industrial project … Especially north of Fort McMurray, where the boreal forest has been razed and bitumen is mined from the ground in immense open pits, the blot on the landscape is incomparable.' Carney has relaxed the emission restrictions that hampered this development (among others) and declared two weeks ago that he wanted Canada to be 'an energy superpower … in both clean and conventional energies. And, yes, that does mean oil and gas. It means using our oil and gas here in Canada to displace imports wherever possible, particularly from the United States. It makes no sense to be sending that money south of the border or across the ocean, so, yes, it also means more oil and gas exports, without question.' • The oil-rich Canadian cowboys who want their own Brexit What accounts for this remarkable transformation? Pure political expediency. Trudeau's policy had been profoundly unpopular, and the Conservative candidate, Pierre Poilievre, constantly referred to 'carbon tax Carney'. So, shamelessly disowning his own previous advocacy, Carney dumped it. Then there were the idiotic threats from Trump to annex Canada. While that will 'never happen' (to quote Carney), the prospect of Albertan secession was less improbable, as that province had been sorely provoked by the ecologically motivated threats to its hydrocarbon industry. Canada as a whole could not afford such a secession, and immediately after Carney's election win, the premier of Alberta, Danielle Smith, introduced a bill to make a referendum on the matter much simpler to implement. She simultaneously called on Carney to make various concessions, which 'must include abandoning the unconstitutional oil and gas production cap'. He got the message. It was no coincidence that, as host of last week's G7 summit, Carney chose to hold it in Alberta. In the final communiqué, the topic of climate change was barely mentioned. To put it mildly, this has confused those who deeply admired Carney, not least in this country, for his previously passionate campaigning against oil and gas investment. But when I asked someone who worked closely with the man at the Bank of England what had happened to his old boss, he laughed and said: 'I must have told you before that Mark is fundamentally a trader, and therefore prepared to adapt principles to circumstances.' This was partly a reference to the fact that Carney's career before becoming a central banker was at Goldman Sachs. But what does this mean for the UK, still thoroughly enmeshed by the net zero policies in which Carney played such a central role? As Brendan Long, a Canadian energy analyst, told The Daily Telegraph last week: 'It means that while Canada's oil and gas industry is ramping up production under Carney, the UK remains aligned with the anti-oil and gas ideology he promoted when he was governor of the Bank of England.' Although Ed Miliband has now indicated a reversal of his opposition to the development of two North Sea fields, known as Rosebank and Jackdaw, the government is keeping its radical policy of banning all new exploration; across the median line, Norway has declared it will be boosting its North Sea exploration and production to the highest level since 2010. The crazy point, which fits in with the government's target but not the national interest, is that if we buy Norwegian gas, it does not come out of our 'carbon budget', as administered by the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero. Similarly, when we've shut down our entire domestic oil and gas operation and are buying the Canadian hydrocarbons that Carney is now so keen to boost, we will make the (unelected) Climate Change Committee — charged with setting our carbon budgets and invigilating our progress to purity — happy. Not so much the British voters, I fear, come our own general election in a few years' time.
Times
an hour ago
- Times
Abortion overreach will backfire on women
One of the many, many reasons I prefer living in the UK to the US is the former's more clement weather, which reflects the country's calmer politics. By contrast, America's storms and wildfires feel like a metaphor for its political debates, not least on abortion. So it's apt that, just as a heatwave arrives in this country, the British left loses its mind over abortion. Last week MPs voted to support an amendment, proposed by the Labour MP Tonia Antoniazzi, which argues that women who obtain an abortion should never be prosecuted, even if it's after the legal 24-week limit. This sounds good in theory (abortion should not be criminalised, yes, agreed) but is in fact completely nuts. The law already allows late-term abortions in extreme circumstances, but now a woman could have an abortion the day before her due date for any reason she fancied. Now, very few women will do this, and in fact very few ever have, and the harrowing stories that have been used to justify this vote largely took place during the Covid lockdown, when women were buying abortion pills in the post and couldn't see doctors to find out how far along they were in their pregnancy. So: not a widespread problem, and one that could be resolved by re-examining how the Crown Prosecution Service deals with these sad cases. • `Read more: MPs vote to decriminalise abortion Instead, MPs have decided to chuck out the UK's heretofore liberal but pragmatic approach in favour of something far more radical that most people don't want: 87 per cent of the British public are in favour of legalised abortion, but more than half draw the line at the abortion of a healthy baby over the six-month limit. Antoniazzi's amendment upends the delicate compromise that existed until now. Sensing their moment has come, politicians on the right are already arguing that the time limit here should be cut, in line with most of Europe. Meanwhile, some on the left are arguing the amendment doesn't go far enough. Stella Creasy proposed a further amendment, which was written by the part-time tax barrister, occasional fox murderer and full-time tweeter Jolyon Maugham, that would have made it impossible even to prosecute those who coerced women into late-term abortions. This was considered so extreme it was rejected by every abortion provider in the country, and also, wisely, by MPs. Undaunted, Creasy, who seems to believe she represents Washington DC rather than Walthamstow, implied that rejecting her amendment was on a par with the overturning of Roe v Wade. By way of evidence, she reeled off voguish American clichés ('the Donald Trump playbook', 'women's bodies as battlefields') which always suggest the speaker is so high on progressive platitudes they have turned off their brain. If Creasy and her ilk want to take lessons from America, they should look at what happened last week to what is euphemistically called 'paediatric gender healthcare'. On Wednesday the Supreme Court allowed red states like Tennessee to ban doctors from giving hormone treatments and body-altering surgery to gender-confused children. It is the latest blow for the gender movement in the US, and it was entirely caused by overreach by activists. Until about a decade ago, people who wanted to live as the opposite sex were seen as a niche adult demographic who should be treated with kindness. But activist groups destroyed that moderate status quo with their ludicrous arguments, such as that male rapists could be sent to women's prisons and there should be no age limit on body-altering surgery for children. The Biden administration blindly supported them until belatedly realising it was following the wilfully blind, and American politicians are now, at last, trying to undo some of the damage. None of this worked out well for trans people or the left. Progressive overreach and reality denial will always cause a backlash, something Maugham should know, given his own flailing gender activism. Creasy, too, has argued that 'some women are born with penises', suggesting a strong disconnect between her beliefs and actual biology. I'm not sure when Labour politicians decided to follow their Democrat counterparts in defending the most extreme version of a social shift, but they need to get a grip. One reason US feminists lost the abortion argument is they insisted abortion was no big deal and derided Hillary Clinton for describing it as something that should be 'safe, legal and rare', saying that last word was 'stigmatising'. It turned out that it's a lot more stigmatising to pretend getting an abortion is just a jolly lark that should come with a loyalty card. When I was 23 and 11 weeks pregnant, I had an abortion, an experience neither jolly nor terrible but necessary. Afterwards, I felt pure gratitude, which is how I still feel about it now. Since then I've sampled many experiences on the fertility menu: given birth to twins, miscarried, had a baby. You don't need to be a wet-eyed sentimentalist to know a baby becomes a baby well before it's born; I could feel when it happened to all of my babies at about the six-month mark. The legal limit exists for good reasons, including the mother's mental health, and maintaining public support for abortion. Arguing that a woman has the right to terminate a fully gestated healthy baby is the most self-defeating version of the pro-choice movement, because it will reinvigorate the anti-abortion argument in this country, just as arguing for the most extreme version of trans rights destroyed the moderate accommodations that existed before. Labour has kicked a hornets' nest with this vote. And it's women who are going to be stung.
