Assisted dying bill splits UK parliament

LONDON — Less than six months after its general election the U.K. has been tipped headfirst into a fraught debate on a matter of life and death.
The landmark piece of legislation currently dominating the nation’s attention does not concern the state of the economy, the NHS, the courts system, housing or welfare.
Instead, MPs will vote Friday on a bill that would for the first time give terminally ill adults in England and Wales the right to die at the time of their choosing.
The U.K. is the latest among a string of European countries to attempt to permit assisted dying. Irish MPs earlier this year endorsed a parliamentary report calling for assisted dying. Similar attempts to introduce legislation have been made recently in Scotland, Jersey and the Isle of Man.Meanwhile, France was debating an assisted dying bill earlier this year, but progress was interrupted due to a snap election. And various forms of assisted dying are already legal in Austria, Belgium, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Spain and Switzerland.
The U.K.’s Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) bill is being treated as a matter of conscience, meaning MPs will be given a free vote and do not have to make their choices along party lines.
The bill was introduced by a backbench Labour MP, Kim Leadbeater, rather than by the government, after Prime Minister Keir Starmer promised ahead of the summer general election to allow the issue to come before parliament.
The question has engendered deep divisions among those with responsibility for deciding and carrying out the potential change in the law.
Starmer’s Cabinet is split in two, while MPs from all the major parties find themselves in disagreement with close colleagues. Medical specialists have also made interventions both for and against the bill.
A recent YouGov study showed that 73 percent of Britons think assisted dying should be legal. However, 19 percent said that while they support assisted dying in principle, they oppose it in practice because they don’t believe adequate laws can be created to regulate it.
Former prime ministers are also split on the subject, with Gordon Brown, Theresa May, Boris Johnson and Liz Truss all against the plan, while David Cameron wrote in the Times that he had changed his mind and now supports assisted dying.
The debate has fostered some unlikely alliances too, with veteran Tory Edward Leigh teaming up with left-wing Labour stalwart Diane Abbott to express concern that the move would put vulnerable people at risk.
As Leadbeater attempted to drum up support for the bill in the final days of campaigning, she told the BBC she thought the vote would be “very close.”
While the proposal was once assumed to have widespread support among new, younger Labour MPs, the outcome now looks extremely uncertain.
This is down, in part, to some striking changes in approach by those at the top of government. 
In his former job as director of public prosecutions, Starmer acted to make it less likely that people motivated by compassion to help someone die would face prosecution. 
Earlier this year he told broadcaster and campaigner Esther Rantzen that he was “personally in favor of changing the law.”
Since he has entered No. 10, however, he has kept out of the fray and refused to say how he will vote on Friday. 
At the same time, Health Secretary Wes Streeting — a prominent member of the Cabinet who would be responsible for implementing the policy — has moved from backing assisted dying to opposing it.
Streeting told Labour MPs last month he didn’t believe Britain’s palliative care system was good enough to support the change — an argument that has dominated the debate ever since, with some complaining of a lack of leadership from Starmer.
Leadbeater in turn said she was “disappointed” by Streeting’s intervention, suggesting he had not read the bill properly before he commented. 
Yet momentum has not moved only in one direction. 
Disability advocates have in the past been among the most influential voices against assisted dying, arguing it could open the way to disabled people being coerced into ending their lives. Leadbeater and her supporters argue it would simply not apply to disabled people.
High-profile disabled members of the House of Lords such as Paralympian Tanni Grey-Thompson and equality campaigner Jane Campbell have both stated their opposition to the bill. 
However, the new parliament includes a higher number of disabled MPs than in previous years, with Labour members forming a Disability Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP) for the first time, joining the Women’s PLP and the Black, Asian, and Minority Ethnic PLP.
Conversations that POLITICO has held with disabled MPs suggest this group, whose voices could prove influential in the debate, is by no means united in opposition to the bill.
Luke Akehurst, a new Labour MP who has reduced mobility, said he wanted to be sure that “all the correct safeguards are in the bill,” but conceded that “at this stage I am minded to vote for the assisted dying law.”
Two other disabled Labour MPs, granted anonymity because they had not yet informed constituents of their views, said they were undecided, with one leaning in favor and one against the bill. 
Others remain opposed, with government whip Vicky Foxcroft confirming to POLITICO that she still believed, as she stated before the election, that “you have a large amount of the population that are terrified of it.”
Marsha de Cordova, who is registered blind, posted on X that disabled people’s “real and legitimate fears must not be ignored.”
If voted down at second reading, the bill will fail. While the result of the vote may be impossible to call, it will have huge ramifications either way. 
Many MPs see this as a one-off chance at progressive social reform, and will not easily forgive their opponents if they succeed in blocking it. 
Paul Blomfield, a former Labour MP who now campaigns for assisted dying, warned that if the bill is rejected, it does not leave “a benign status quo — it’s either voting for Kim’s bill or endorsing the status quo, which is deeply cruel and distressing.”
If the bill progresses, parliamentary scrutiny could continue for months, drawing time and energy away from the government’s agenda. 
The government may find it difficult not to become more closely involved in a cause which some members of the Cabinet fervently oppose.
It’s also not yet clear what body would be responsible for administering any service that might allow people to choose to die. The issue is certain to be controversial as the NHS remains under severe strain. 
With Starmer inevitably having to put down his marker this week, the list of unenviable tasks he faces in this parliament only seems to grow.
John Johnston, Bethany Dawson and Claudia Chiappa contributed to this report.