Peers clash with Esther Rantzen over plans to delay and change assisted dying bill
Dame Esther Rantzen has been told she does not understand how British parliamentary democracy works after she suggested that members of the House of Lords should not hold up the assisted dying legislation.
Kim Leadbeater 's bill passed by a narrow majority of just 23 on its final third reading vote in the Commons on Friday but now faces a long haul in the Lords as peers prepare to lay down hundreds of amendments.
There is a danger that the bill will get held up so much that it will not have time to pass into law and Dame Esther hit out at peers who effectively want to use procedure to ensure it falls.
Speaking on Radio 4's Today Programme the 85-year-old TV personality who has a terminal cancer diagnosis said: 'I don't need to teach the House of Lords how to do their job. They know it very well, and they know that laws are produced by the elected chamber.
"Their job is to scrutinise, to ask questions, but not to oppose.
"So yes, people who are adamantly opposed to this bill, and they have a perfect right to oppose it, will try and stop it going through the Lords, but the Lords themselves, their duty is to make sure that law is actually created by the elected chamber, which is the House of Commons who have voted this through."
But a senior Tory peer and opponent of assisted dying Lord Stewart Jackson has hit back telling The Independent that Dame Esther does not understand how parliament works.
"Our system doesn't work like that,' he said. 'The House of Lords is quite within its constitutional rights and privileges to amend or delay a Bill which was never put to the people in a manifesto, backed by only a minority of MPs, was poorly drafted, rushed and barely scrutinised and will have hugely profound effects on vulnerable people and the resources of the NHS."
Meanwhile, another opponent, former Paralympian Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson, also made it clear she intends to bring in a large number of changes to the Bill.
Speaking on BBC Breakfast, she said: "I mean, currently it can be offered to people with learning disabilities without training. There's loopholes on anorexia.
"And I think there are loopholes around children - a young person only has to say the conversation started on their 18th birthday, and that's it."
She said people are "scared" on both sides of the debate, adding: "I think we have to find a way through this.
"That's actually the Lords' job, you know, the Lords is there to amend, it's there to improve, and it's there to try and sort of reconcile lots of different, very complicated views.
Baroness Grey-Thompson added: "I'm worried about disabled people. This Bill is not going to take place in isolation of the swingeing government cuts that we're expecting around disability and the welfare system has to be reformed."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Rhyl Journal
24 minutes ago
- Rhyl Journal
Streeting: Assisted dying will take ‘time and money that is in short supply'
The Health Secretary, who opposed the legislation in the Commons, said better end-of-life care was needed to prevent terminally ill people feeling they had no alternative but to end their own life. Mr Streeting, writing on his Facebook page, said he could not ignore the concerns 'about the risks that come with this Bill' raised by the Royal College of Psychiatrists, the Royal College of Physicians, the Association for Palliative Medicine and charities representing under-privileged groups. The Government is neutral on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill which cleared the Commons with a majority of 23 votes on Friday. Mr Streeting, who was one of the most senior opponents of the legislation, said: 'Gordon Brown wrote this week that 'there is no effective freedom to choose if the alternative option, the freedom to draw on high-quality end-of-life care, is not available. Neither is there real freedom to choose if, as many fear, patients will feel under pressure to relieve their relatives of the burden of caring for them, a form of coercion that prioritising good end-of-life care would diminish.' He is right. 'The truth is that creating those conditions will take time and money. 'Even with the savings that might come from assisted dying if people take up the service – and it feels uncomfortable talking about savings in this context to be honest – setting up this service will also take time and money that is in short supply. 'There isn't a budget for this. Politics is about prioritising. It is a daily series of choices and trade-offs. I fear we've made the wrong one.' Mr Streeting said his Department of Health and Social Care 'will continue to work constructively with Parliament to assist on technical aspects of the Bill' as it goes through the House of Lords. Assisted dying campaigner Dame Esther Rantzen urged peers not to block the landmark legislation. Dame Esther told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: 'I don't need to teach the House of Lords how to do their job. 'They know it very well, and they know that laws are produced by the elected chamber. 'Their job is to scrutinise, to ask questions, but not to oppose. 'So yes, people who are adamantly opposed to this Bill, and they have a perfect right to oppose it, will try and stop it going through the Lords, but the Lords themselves, their duty is to make sure that law is actually created by the elected chamber, which is the House of Commons who have voted this through.' Dame Esther, who turns 85 on Sunday and has terminal cancer, acknowledged the legislation would probably not become law in time for her to use it and she would have to 'buzz off to Zurich' to use the Dignitas clinic. Paralympian and crossbench peer Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson told BBC Breakfast: 'We're getting ready for it to come to the Lords and from my personal point of view, about amending it to make it stronger. 'We've been told it's the strongest Bill in the world, but to be honest, it's not a very high bar for other legislation. 'So I do think there are a lot more safeguards that could be put in.' Conservative peer and disability rights campaigner Lord Shinkwin said the narrow Commons majority underlined the need for peers to take a close look at the legislation. He told Today 'I think the House of Lords has a duty to expose and to subject this Bill to forensic scrutiny' but 'I don't think it's a question of blocking it so much as performing our duty as a revising chamber'. Lord Shinkwin added: 'The margin yesterday was so close that many MPs would appreciate the opportunity to look at this again in respect of safeguards as they relate to those who feel vulnerable, whether that's disabled people or older people.' Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, who steered the Bill through the Commons, told the PA news agency she hoped peers would not seek to derail the legislation, which could run out of parliamentary time if it is held up in the Lords. She said: 'I would be upset to think that anybody was playing games with such an important and such an emotional issue.'
Powys County Times
24 minutes ago
- Powys County Times
Streeting: Assisted dying will take ‘time and money that is in short supply'
Wes Streeting has warned that legalising assisted dying would take 'time and money' away from other parts of the health service. The Health Secretary, who opposed the legislation in the Commons, said better end-of-life care was needed to prevent terminally ill people feeling they had no alternative but to end their own life. Mr Streeting, writing on his Facebook page, said he could not ignore the concerns 'about the risks that come with this Bill' raised by the Royal College of Psychiatrists, the Royal College of Physicians, the Association for Palliative Medicine and charities representing under-privileged groups. The Government is neutral on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill which cleared the Commons with a majority of 23 votes on Friday. Mr Streeting, who was one of the most senior opponents of the legislation, said: 'Gordon Brown wrote this week that 'there is no effective freedom to choose if the alternative option, the freedom to draw on high-quality end-of-life care, is not available. Neither is there real freedom to choose if, as many fear, patients will feel under pressure to relieve their relatives of the burden of caring for them, a form of coercion that prioritising good end-of-life care would diminish.' He is right. 'The truth is that creating those conditions will take time and money. 'Even with the savings that might come from assisted dying if people take up the service – and it feels uncomfortable talking about savings in this context to be honest – setting up this service will also take time and money that is in short supply. 'There isn't a budget for this. Politics is about prioritising. It is a daily series of choices and trade-offs. I fear we've made the wrong one.' Mr Streeting said his Department of Health and Social Care 'will continue to work constructively with Parliament to assist on technical aspects of the Bill' as it goes through the House of Lords. Assisted dying campaigner Dame Esther Rantzen urged peers not to block the landmark legislation. Dame Esther told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: 'I don't need to teach the House of Lords how to do their job. 'They know it very well, and they know that laws are produced by the elected chamber. 'Their job is to scrutinise, to ask questions, but not to oppose. 'So yes, people who are adamantly opposed to this Bill, and they have a perfect right to oppose it, will try and stop it going through the Lords, but the Lords themselves, their duty is to make sure that law is actually created by the elected chamber, which is the House of Commons who have voted this through.' Dame Esther, who turns 85 on Sunday and has terminal cancer, acknowledged the legislation would probably not become law in time for her to use it and she would have to 'buzz off to Zurich' to use the Dignitas clinic. Paralympian and crossbench peer Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson told BBC Breakfast: 'We're getting ready for it to come to the Lords and from my personal point of view, about amending it to make it stronger. 'We've been told it's the strongest Bill in the world, but to be honest, it's not a very high bar for other legislation. 'So I do think there are a lot more safeguards that could be put in.' Conservative peer and disability rights campaigner Lord Shinkwin said the narrow Commons majority underlined the need for peers to take a close look at the legislation. He told Today 'I think the House of Lords has a duty to expose and to subject this Bill to forensic scrutiny' but 'I don't think it's a question of blocking it so much as performing our duty as a revising chamber'. Lord Shinkwin added: 'The margin yesterday was so close that many MPs would appreciate the opportunity to look at this again in respect of safeguards as they relate to those who feel vulnerable, whether that's disabled people or older people.' Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, who steered the Bill through the Commons, told the PA news agency she hoped peers would not seek to derail the legislation, which could run out of parliamentary time if it is held up in the Lords. She said: 'I would be upset to think that anybody was playing games with such an important and such an emotional issue.'
The Guardian
29 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Kneecap's Glastonbury performance not ‘appropriate', says Keir Starmer
Kneecap's Glastonbury festival performance next Saturday is not 'appropriate', Keir Starmer has said. Kneecap member Liam Óg Ó hAnnaidh appeared in court on Wednesday after allegedly displaying a flag in support of the proscribed terrorist organisation Hezbollah and saying 'up Hamas, up Hezbollah' at a gig in November last year. In an interview with the Sun, the prime minister was asked if he thought the trio should perform at Glastonbury. 'No, I don't, and I think we need to come down really clearly on this,' Starmer said. 'This is about the threats that shouldn't be made, I won't say too much because there's a court case on, but I don't think that's appropriate.' Earlier on Saturday the Conservative party leader, Kemi Badenoch, said she thought the BBC 'should not be showing' Kneecap's performance at the festival. In a post on X, accompanied by an article from he Times that claimed the BBC had not banned the group, Badenoch said: 'The BBC should not be showing Kneecap propaganda. One Kneecap band member is currently on bail, charged under the Terrorism Act. 'As a publicly funded platform, the BBC should not be rewarding extremism.' Badenoch previously called for the group to be banned from Glastonbury. Last year Kneecap won a discrimination case against the UK government in Belfast high court after Badenoch tried to refuse them a £14,250 funding award when she was a minister in the previous government. A BBC spokesperson said: 'As the broadcast partner, the BBC will be bringing audiences extensive music coverage from Glastonbury, with artists booked by the festival organisers. 'Whilst the BBC doesn't ban artists, our plans will ensure that our programming will meet our editorial guidelines. Decisions about our output will be made in the lead-up to the festival.' On Wednesday, Ó hAnnaidh, who performs under the stage name Mo Chara, was cheered by hundreds of supporters as he arrived with bandmates Naoise O Cairealláin and JJ Ó Dochartaigh at Westminster magistrates court in 'Free Mo Chara' T-shirts. Ó hAnnaidh was released on unconditional bail until his next hearing on 20 August. After the hearing, the rapper said: 'For anybody going to Glastonbury, you can see us there at 4pm on the Saturday. 'If you can't be there we'll be on the BBC, if anybody watches the BBC. We'll be at Wembley in September. 'But most importantly: free, free Palestine.' The charge followed a counter-terrorism police investigation after gig footage came to light, which also allegedly showed the group calling for the deaths of MPs. In April, Kneecap apologised to the families of murdered MPs but said footage of the incident had been 'exploited and weaponised'.
