Assisted Dying Bill: Scrutiny Must Not Become Obstruction

The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill is one of the most sensitive and deeply personal pieces of legislation Parliament has considered in recent years. It is absolutely right that it has been subject to careful and detailed scrutiny.

In the House of Commons alone, more than 200 hours of parliamentary time were devoted to debating this Bill, far more time than many other proposed pieces of major legislation receive. MPs voted according to conscience and compassion. I was contacted by hundreds of constituents who shared incredibly moving and personal stories. After careful reflection, I made my decision and cast my vote. That democratic process, and the outcome of it, deserves to run its course.

Since June 2025, however, what has played out in the House of Lords has gone beyond proper scrutiny. Even with additional time being allocated, progress has slowed to an almost glacial pace. Over 1,200 amendments have been tabled, many of them repetitive or simply unworkable, with the effect of delaying the Bill until it runs out of time.

Cross-party supporters and opponents of the Bill agree: the Lords’ constitutional role is to revise and improve legislation, then return it to the elected House – not to block it through procedural tactics. The public rightly expect Parliament to complete its work properly, especially on an issue of such sensitivity and importance.

With a new Parliamentary session expected to begin in mid-May, this debate should continue, but it must do so efficiently and in a way that allows the elected House to have the final say. If we continue at this rate, the Bill will simply be lost.

Arcane procedures and filibuster-style tactics should not be used to frustrate the will of the elected chamber and a large majority of the public.