Today, we had the first day of Report Stage for the Assisted Dying Bill.
Constituents will remember that, before the first vote on Assisted Dying, I held a public meeting to hear your views and perspectives on this important issue. Over 600 constituents have also taken the time to write to me to share their experiences. I want to thank everyone who has taken the time to speak to me.
I ultimately decided to support the Assisted Dying Bill at its first Commons vote at the end of last year. I did so because I believed the Bill as it then stood, contained the right safeguards to protect vulnerable people, while allowing those who were approaching the end of their lives the choice about how they wish to die.
At Report Stage, MPs consider amendments proposed to the Bill. There isn’t a vote on the Bill as a whole. That will come at a later date.
Two amendments were put to a vote today. In the interests of transparency, I have set out below what the clauses relate to and how I decided to vote, as well as the ultimate decision the Commons reached on each amendment.
At the public meeting, one concern raised repeatedly was that medical professionals must be protected, and their decision about whether to take part in the process of offering assisted deaths be respected. As the Bill entered Committee Stage, I worked with the BMA and other colleagues to address this issue and tighten up the protections in the Bill further. Although my amendments were not ultimately accepted, the issues I wanted to see addressed have been addressed by the amendments voted on today.
There will be further amendments considered at the next day of Report Stage (likely to be on 13 June) which aim to introduce further safeguards, clear up the process, and affect the implementation of the Bill. I will of course set out how I handle these amendments following the second day of Report Stage, as well.
Vote 1: New Clause 10
I voted for
Result: agreed (voice vote)
This clause tightens protections for medical professionals who choose not to undertake assisted dying, including protecting them from detriment under the Employment Rights Act 1996. It was introduced by the Bill’s sponsor, Kim Leadbeater.
As already stated, I believe it should be a matter of personal conscience whether medical professionals choose to take part in the assisted dying process, and I attempted to amend the Bill in a similar fashion during Committee Stage. With this in mind, I voted for this amendment. The amendment passed.
Vote 2: New Clause 10a
I voted against
Result: not agreed (Noes 279 / Ayes 243)
This new clause would mean that employees whose employers did not want to take part in the process would also not be allowed to take part.
I believe choice should work both ways, so for me, this would restrict individual medical professionals’ right to choose whether to take part or not. It is also not clear what this would mean for employees who work for multiple employers. The amendment did not pass.
