White House slaps down Britain over assisted dying ‘surrender'
The White House has accused Britain of 'state-sponsored suicide' over the passage of the Assisted Dying Bill.
The US state department criticised parliament for passing the bill, which will make it legal for terminally ill people to end their lives.
'As the UK Parliament considers support for state-subsidised suicide, euphemistically called a bill for 'terminally ill adults' the United States reaffirms the sanctity of life,' the US bureau of democracy, human rights and labour said.
'The western world should stand for life, vitality and hope over surrender and death.'
The Trump administration is proving increasingly willing to intervene in domestic British affairs, having previously admonished Sir Keir Starmer's government over threats to free speech.
Last week the House of Commons voted narrowly to support Kim Leadbeater's assisted dying bill, and it will now be scrutinised in the House of Lords.
The private member's bill was supported by 314 to 291 in the Commons, a majority of 23, paving the way for assisted dying services to be introduced by the end of the decade.
Critics of the legislation have warned its safeguards are not strong enough and vulnerable people could be coerced or feel pressured into ending their lives early.
The UK government is officially neutral on the bill, and MPs were given a free vote, which meant they did not have to vote along party lines.
The bill is at odds with the values of Mr Trump's administration despite similar legislation existing in twelve US jurisdictions, including Washington, DC.
While Mr Trump's position on assisted dying is not clear, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, two of the president's Supreme Court nominees, are both firm opponents of the act.
Downing Street is thought to have been blindsided by the intervention, which was not raised with David Lammy, the foreign secretary, during his meeting with Mr Rubio last week.
Sir Keir Starmer, a supporter of the legislation, said he will make assisted dying work, in a rebuke to his Health Secretary who claimed there was no budget for it.
Asked whether the will of Parliament should be implemented and the budget found during his trip to The Hague the Prime Minister said: 'It is my responsibility to make sure the bill is workable, and that means workable in all its aspects. I'm confident we've done that preparation.'
It is rare for the US state department, which is responsible for its foreign policy, to comment on laws of an allied country.
Last month, The Telegraph revealed the US president dispatched officials to meet British pro-life activists over concerns their freedom of expression had been threatened.
A five-person team from the bureau of democracy, human rights and labour spent days in the country and interviewed campaigners to feed back to the White House.
Led by Samuel Samson, a senior adviser, they met with officials from the Foreign Office and challenged Ofcom on the Online Safety Act, which is thought to be a point of contention in the administration.
Since then, the state department has also raised concerns over Lucy Connolly, the wife of a Conservative councillor, was jailed for 31 months in October after pleading guilty to a charge of inciting racial hatred.
Campaigners flagged her case with Marco Rubio, the US secretary of state, whose department in turn said it was 'monitoring' the case.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
North Wales Chronicle
10 minutes ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Government expected to unveil welfare concessions after talks with Labour rebels
Number 10 had been locked in crisis talks with backbenchers after some 126 MPs within the party signed an amendment that would halt the legislation in its tracks. On Thursday night, sources said a deal was being thrashed out between leading rebels and the Government as it seeks to head off the prospect of Sir Keir Starmer's first Commons defeat in a crunch vote next week. The Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill has its second reading on Tuesday, the first opportunity for MPs to support or reject it. If the legislation clears its first hurdle, it will then face a few hours' examination by all MPs the following week – rather than days or weeks in front of a committee tasked with looking at the Bill. The Government's original package restricted eligibility for the personal independence payment (Pip), the main disability payment in England, and limited the sickness-related element of universal credit. Existing claimants were to be given a 13-week phase-out period of financial support in an earlier move that was seen as a bid to head off opposition by aiming to soften the impact of the changes. However, concessions offered by the Government to save the Bill from defeat are understood to include a commitment that those currently receiving Pip will continue to get the allowance. Ministers had hoped the reforms would get more people back into work and save up to £5 billion a year, but fresh changes such as these would leave Chancellor Rachel Reeves needing to find more money elsewhere. The Government had earlier said it was listening to suggestions to improve the legislation amid concerns about the swift timetable of the Bill. The so-called 'reasoned amendment' led by Treasury select committee chairwoman Dame Meg Hillier had argued that disabled people have not been properly consulted and further scrutiny of the changes is needed. Speaking in the Commons earlier, Sir Keir told MPs he wanted the reforms to demonstrate 'Labour values of fairness' and that discussions about the changes would continue over the coming days. He said there was 'consensus across the House on the urgent need for reform' of the 'broken' welfare system. 'I know colleagues across the House are eager to start fixing that, and so am I, and that all colleagues want to get this right, and so do I,' he said. 'We want to see reform implemented with Labour values of fairness. 'That conversation will continue in the coming days, so we can begin making change together on Tuesday.'
Reuters
11 minutes ago
- Reuters
Following NATO summit, Trump and Europe still at odds over Putin's ambitions
THE HAGUE, June 26 (Reuters) - For U.S. President Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin is a man looking for an off-ramp to his bloody three-year assault on Ukraine. But according to NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, the Russian leader may be just getting started. If the alliance does not invest in its defense capabilities, Rutte warned the annual NATO summit on Tuesday, Russia could attack an alliance country within three years. By most measures, this year's NATO summit in The Hague was a success. Member states largely agreed to a U.S. demand to boost defense spending to 5% of gross domestic product. Trump, who once derided the alliance as a "rip-off," said his view had changed, while a budding bromance blossomed between him and Rutte, who compared the U.S. president to a stern "daddy" managing his geopolitical underlings. But the summit, which ended on Wednesday, also highlighted the widening gap between how the U.S. and Europe see the military ambitions of Russia, the bloc's main foil. That is despite some lawmakers in Trump's own Republican Party hardening their rhetoric in recent weeks, arguing that while the president's ambition to negotiate an end to Russia's war in Ukraine is laudable, it is now clear that Putin is not serious about coming to the table. In a Wednesday press conference, Trump conceded that it was "possible" Putin had territorial ambitions beyond Ukraine. But he insisted that the Russian leader - buffeted by manpower and materiel losses - wanted the war to end quickly. "I know one thing: He'd like to settle," Trump said. "He'd like to get out of this thing. It's a mess for him." Secretary of State Marco Rubio echoed Trump's view in a sideline interview with Politico, saying the U.S. was holding off on expanding its sanctions against Moscow, in part to keep talks going. "If we did what everybody here wants us to do - and that is come in and crush them with more sanctions - we probably lose our ability to talk to them about the ceasefire," he said. The message from others at the summit was starkly different. A senior NATO official told reporters in a Tuesday briefing that Putin was not in fact interested in a ceasefire - or in engaging in good-faith talks at all. "Regardless of battlefield dynamics, we continue to doubt that Russia has any interest in meaningful negotiations," the official said. Russia's ambitions, the senior official said, go beyond control of "certain territories at their administrative lines," as Rubio put it. Putin is instead bent on imposing his "political will" on neighboring states. Rutte put the Russian threat in existential terms. "If we do not invest now," he said on Tuesday, "we are really at risk that the Russians might try something against NATO territory in three, five or seven years." The U.S. is not the only NATO member with a more optimistic view of Russia. Speaking to reporters on Wednesday, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, a longtime Trump ally and critic of European institutions, said Russia was "not strong enough to represent a real threat to NATO." Still, as the alliance's largest contributor and most powerful member, Washington's position is a central preoccupation in most NATO capitals. The White House, asked for comment, referred to Trump's comments at the Wednesday press conference. In response to a request for comment, a separate NATO official, also speaking on condition of anonymity, disputed that there were differing assessments within the alliance, pointing to a NATO declaration on Wednesday which referenced the "long-term threat posed by Russia." The Russian embassy in Washington referred to Thursday comments by Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, who criticized NATO for wasting money on defense. "It seems that only by invoking the fabricated 'Russian threat' will it be possible to explain to ordinary people why their pockets are being emptied once again," she said. The U.S. State Department and the Ukrainian embassy in Washington did not respond to requests for comment. The lack of a common understanding about Putin's goals will complicate future diplomatic plans to wind down the war, said Philippe Dickinson, the deputy director of the Transatlantic Security Initiative at the Atlantic Council and a former British diplomat. "To reach a peace agreement, it's not just something that Trump and Putin can agree themselves," Dickinson said. "There does need to be European involvement. That needs to mean that there is some sort of sharing of views among allies on what Putin is trying to achieve." European leaders likely have not given up on trying to change Trump's views on Russia, Dickinson said. But they were always unlikely bring up thorny conversations at the NATO summit. The alliance's main goal was to simply get through it without major blowups, he said, an aim that was accomplished. Still, peace came at a cost - the lack of substantive discussion around Ukraine and Russia, he argued, was conspicuous. "The lack of a Russia strategy is a real glaring omission from what the summit could have produced," Dickinson said.
The Herald Scotland
19 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
Government expected to unveil welfare concessions after talks with Labour rebels
On Thursday night, sources said a deal was being thrashed out between leading rebels and the Government as it seeks to head off the prospect of Sir Keir Starmer's first Commons defeat in a crunch vote next week. The Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payment Bill has its second reading on Tuesday, the first opportunity for MPs to support or reject it. If the legislation clears its first hurdle, it will then face a few hours' examination by all MPs the following week – rather than days or weeks in front of a committee tasked with looking at the Bill. The Government's original package restricted eligibility for the personal independence payment (Pip), the main disability payment in England, and limited the sickness-related element of universal credit. Existing claimants were to be given a 13-week phase-out period of financial support in an earlier move that was seen as a bid to head off opposition by aiming to soften the impact of the changes. However, concessions offered by the Government to save the Bill from defeat are understood to include a commitment that those currently receiving Pip will continue to get the allowance. Ministers had hoped the reforms would get more people back into work and save up to £5 billion a year, but fresh changes such as these would leave Chancellor Rachel Reeves needing to find more money elsewhere. The Government had earlier said it was listening to suggestions to improve the legislation amid concerns about the swift timetable of the Bill. The so-called 'reasoned amendment' led by Treasury select committee chairwoman Dame Meg Hillier had argued that disabled people have not been properly consulted and further scrutiny of the changes is needed. Speaking in the Commons earlier, Sir Keir told MPs he wanted the reforms to demonstrate 'Labour values of fairness' and that discussions about the changes would continue over the coming days. He said there was 'consensus across the House on the urgent need for reform' of the 'broken' welfare system. 'I know colleagues across the House are eager to start fixing that, and so am I, and that all colleagues want to get this right, and so do I,' he said. 'We want to see reform implemented with Labour values of fairness. 'That conversation will continue in the coming days, so we can begin making change together on Tuesday.'
