Kim Leadbeater MP: speeches 2025

499 published records · newest first.

Speeches

  • 5 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Eighteenth sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    This service, like many others, will be delivered through a range of providers, as alluded to by the right hon. Member for North West Hampshire. I understand the keenness to have this debate now, but we will come on to it further down the line. The hon. Member for East Wiltshire is right that this is really important.

  • 5 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Eighteenth sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    It will be.

  • 5 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Eighteenth sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    I just want to provide some reassurance to my hon. Friend the Member for Bradford West. I have met my hon. Friend the Member for Lowestoft and today I will support amendment 20, which she has tabled. I hope that provides some reassurance to my hon. Friend the Member for Bradford West.

  • 5 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Eighteenth sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    Hopefully the Minister and other colleagues are reassured that, if the Committee agrees to the introduction of the voluntary assisted dying commission, monitoring will be very intense and reporting will be very robust. That might allay some of the fears that have been raised today.

  • 5 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Eighteenth sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    I welcome this important debate about the impact of this potential legislation on Wales. I thank the right hon. Member for Dwyfor Meirionnydd for her valuable contributions. I also welcome the Minister’s commitment to meet the right hon. Lady and me for discussions with parliamentary counsel and the relevant authorities. This is really important. The criminal justice system covers England and Wales, so it is important for the Bill to do the same, given that it disapplies the Suicide Act in certain very carefully defined circumstances. But health is, of course, devolved and the Welsh Government quite rightly make decisions on the Welsh NHS. I want to make it clear that I recognise that reality and its importance, and I am fully committed to observing the same conventions that the Government would if this were a Government Bill. As has been said, I am working with UK Government officials to ensure that the right steps are taken at the right time, and I would expect to engage colleagues in the Welsh Government as the Bill progresses. Indeed, I really look forward to doing so and would be happy to visit the Senate if appropriate—although, as Members can tell, I need to work on my Welsh a bit. I look forward to continuing these conversations.

  • 5 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Eighteenth sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    I understand the hon. Gentleman’s keenness to get to the debate on clause 32, on the provision of the service—we will come to that in due course—but this conversation is about the amendment. To be clear, there is no expectation that assisted dying would be set up as a private enterprise or service. It would be delivered within the provision of the NHS.

  • 5 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Eighteenth sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    My hon. Friend is absolutely right. If the Bill passes, it will be a huge change. We have a duty to the public to show that we are including sufficient detail in the Bill and to provide reassurance in any way we can. To be honest, I would quite like to put the entire training manual in the Bill, but I appreciate that from a legislative perspective that is not possible. However, there are occasions when, for the avoidance of doubt, we should make certain provisions clear on the face of the Bill. That brings me to amendment 20, which was tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Lowestoft, who has a huge amount of experience and expertise in the field to which it relates. Her amendment states: “Regulations under subsection (3)(a) must specify that training in respect of domestic abuse, including coercive control and financial abuse is mandatory.” At the moment, there are no safeguards for terminally ill victims of domestic abuse, financial abuse or coercive control. That concerns me, and it feeds into the points made by my hon. Friend the Member for Bradford West. If a victim of domestic abuse or coercive control—it is often a woman, as we know—is also terminally ill, I can only imagine what a lonely place that is. At the moment, that person is under no supervision. Sadly, there have been instances in which those people have taken their own life. They will continue to be the victims of their incredibly difficult personal circumstances on top of having a terminal illness, which is an absolute tragedy. Opening up the conversation with doctors and healthcare professionals about their circumstances has to be a good thing. It will shed light and transparency on what must be an incredibly difficult situation.

  • 5 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Eighteenth sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

  • 5 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Eighteenth sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    I can confirm that the chief medical officer for Wales was invited to give evidence. I do not know the circumstances of why he did not. If it is helpful for me or other colleagues to meet him, the offer is definitely open.

  • 5 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Eighteenth sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    I am in the process of tabling an amendment that would change the panel to that effect, so that it would speak to the patient. Hopefully, that provides some more reassurance for my hon. Friend. I am sure that we are working very effectively through the Committee process to achieve what we all want to see.

  • 5 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Nineteeth sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    We did not reject proposals for the preliminary discussion not to be taken by people under 18. We actually put a clause into the Bill that would ensure that the preliminary discussion was not taken with someone under 18.

  • 5 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Nineteeth sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    This is a thought based on the comments by the hon. Member for Reigate. The issue of photographic ID is worth giving consideration. Photo ID is used in multiple settings for different reasons. My slight concern is that some of the people we are thinking about with this Bill would be older and I think of some of my own family members who no longer have driving licences, passports or potentially any form of photographic ID. I would be concerned this could be a barrier for terminally ill people. Considering we are making this a robust process, which I totally agree with, I would be concerned that might present an issue.

  • 5 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Nineteeth sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    You will be delighted, Chair, that I have nothing further to add. Amendment 189 agreed to. Amendments made: 190, in clause 6, page 3, line 31, leave out “at the same time as that declaration is made” and insert “before signing that declaration”. This amendment provides that the required two forms of proof of identity must be provided before the person signs the first declaration. Amendment 191, in clause 6, page 3, line 35, at end insert— “(3A) The coordinating doctor may witness the first declaration only if satisfied that the requirements of subsection (2) have been met.” This amendment provides that the coordinating doctor may witness the first declaration only if satisfied that the requirements of subsection (2) are met. Amendment 419, in clause 6, page 3, line 35, at end insert— “(3B) The coordinating doctor may witness the first declaration only if— (a) the coordinating doctor has conducted a preliminary discussion with the person or is satisfied that another registered medical practitioner has conducted such a discussion, and (b) the coordinating doctor has made or seen a written record of the preliminary discussion.” This amendment provides that the coordinating doctor may witness the first declaration only if satisfied that a preliminary discussion of the kind mentioned in clause 4 has taken place and that a written record of it has been made. Amendment 192, in clause 6, page 3, line 36, leave out subsection (4).— (Kim Leadbeater.) See the statement for Amendment 188. Clause 6, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 7 First doctor’s assessment (coordinating doctor) Amendment proposed : 296, in clause 7, page 4, line 2, leave out from “must” to end of line 3, and insert “after a first declaration is made by a person, arrange a time and which is convenient for both the medical practitioner and the person date that does not jeopardise the care of other patients, to carry out the first assessment.”— (Naz Shah.) This amendment replaces the requirement that the coordinating doctor to arrange a first assessment as soon as practicable with a requirement to arrange it for a mutually convenient time which doesn’t jeopardise the care of other patients.

  • 5 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Nineteeth sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    My hon. Friend makes a powerful point. If we think about some of the people we have met—the families who have lost loved ones to terminal illness and the patients who are terminally ill—they are very clear in their decision. For me, it would be another barrier to those patients, who are dying people, to make them see a psychiatrist for every single case.

  • 5 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Nineteeth sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    I do not consider for one second that there is any ill intent behind the amendment, but I am slightly concerned about the language, which is what I think my hon. Friend the Member for Rother Valley meant. The issue is the suggestion that a doctor would, in any circumstances, jeopardise the care of other patients. We are talking about doctors a lot, and we have the utmost respect for medical practitioners, but I imagine that that would be a worrying concept to have in writing from their perspective.

  • 5 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Nineteeth sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    That has been a very useful discussion. I have nothing to add.

  • 5 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Nineteeth sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    This group of amendments is consequential on new clause 8, which would create a single duty for the Secretary of State to consult before making regulations under various provisions of the Bill. It would consolidate the previous requirements to consult in relation to clauses 5, 8 and 19 and expand the duty to cover additional clauses. It would require the Secretary of State to consult the Equality and Human Rights Commission and such other persons as the Secretary of State considers appropriate. The persons to be consulted under subsection (1)(b) must include persons appearing to the Secretary of State to have expertise in matters relating to whether persons have capacity, and persons appearing to the Secretary of State to have expertise in matters relating to whether persons have been coerced. This is an important strengthening of the Bill. It applies to multiple clauses: clauses 5, 7, 8, 13, 19 and 21. The duty to consult experts, particularly on issues around capacity and assessing for coercion, is an important change that reflects the detailed debate that the Committee has undertaken on those two important issues. Amendment 233 brings together the various provisions about the procedure for regulations. It would make the regulations to be made under clauses 5 and 8, on training, qualifications and experience, subject to the draft affirmative procedure, so that Parliament has to debate and approve them first. Again, that would strengthen the Bill.

  • 5 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Nineteeth sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    Amendment 419 provides that the co-ordinating doctor may witness the first declaration only if satisfied that a preliminary discussion of the kind mentioned in clause 4 has taken place and that a written record of it has been made. The co-ordinating doctor must have made or seen a written record of the preliminary discussion. Amendment 189 adjusts the wording so as not to suggest that a first declaration has been made before it is witnessed to clarify that proof of identity must be provided before the declaration is signed and witnessed. Amendment 190 provides that the required two forms of proof of identity must be provided before the person signs the first declaration. Amendment 191 provides that the co-ordinating doctor may witness the first declaration only if satisfied that the requirements of clause 6(2) are met; that is to say, that the patient has provided two forms of identity to the co-ordinating doctor. This is a relatively straightforward set of amendments to tidy up the requirements around proof of identity.

  • 5 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Nineteeth sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    The hon. Lady is making a powerful speech, and I understand that the amendments come from a very good place, and a very strong and experienced one, but she just made the point that eating disorders are treatable. That is the whole point: they would not fall under the criteria in the Bill.

  • 5 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Nineteeth sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    I am indeed happy to accept amendment 21 as well.

  • 5 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Nineteeth sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    The hon. Lady is making some interesting points, but would she agree that we are talking about not new patients, but existing patients who are already in their last few months of life? It will not create a whole new pressure on the health service, because they are already receiving treatment.

  • 5 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Nineteeth sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    I will not test the patience of the Committee by repeating the Minister’s comments on amendments 197 and 198, but he is absolutely right that they relate to the duty imposed on the Secretary of State to make regulations about the training, qualifications and experience required to act as the independent doctor. I hope that Committee members can support them. Amendment 21 was tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Lowestoft, and further to my comments this morning on the very similar amendment 20, I am very pleased to support amendment 21. We have spoken a lot about the training requirements for the provisions of the Bill, and I firmly believe that we have to set ourselves the very high standard of having the best training that we possibly can for medical practitioners involved in the processes set out in the legislation. It is vital because only those medical practitioners who have chosen to undergo such training would be allowed to play the role of assessing doctors. We have already discussed many of the components that will be required in that training, but it must include assessing capacity and detecting coercion or pressure, which is in line with this amendment, so I am very pleased to support it in that regard. Doctors must have appropriate qualifications and experience to ensure that those seeking assistance under the legislation are in the best possible hands throughout. I also welcome the comments made by my hon. Friend the Member for Banbury about the wider benefits of such training, which is a really important point to make. It feeds into the wider benefits that there would be for not just the health service but society as a whole. It also feeds into the work that is being done by the Home Office and my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham Yardley (Jess Phillips), who is the Minister for Safeguarding and Violence Against Women and Girls—I just had to google the fancy title that she goes by nowadays. There is a broader conversation to be had about society and the role of training for coercive control, financial abuse and domestic abuse. I support amendment 21, along with my amendments 197 and 198. Amendment 56 negatived.

  • 5 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Nineteeth sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    I will do the easy bits first. As the Minister said, amendment 370 in my name is a drafting change to the definition of a psychiatrist, which is obviously very important. These useful amendments have enabled us to have this discussion, and they all come from a good place in trying to enhance safeguarding within the Bill. On organ donation, my sister-in-law has had two kidney transplants. On neither occasion, to my understanding, did a psychiatrist speak to either her or the organ donor, who in one instance was her brother—my sister-in-law would be very upset that I have mentioned her in Parliament. My understanding of the law is that someone may be referred to a mental health specialist. I am happy to be corrected if that is not the case, but I do not think a consultation with a psychiatrist is compulsory. As I said to my hon. Friend the Member for Stroud, it is absolutely right that we support amendment 6. From the start, I have been clear that we should move from “may” to “must” in referring to a psychiatrist where either doctor has any doubt. That is a sensible approach, and it covers most of today’s discussion. However, introducing a whole new system that would almost sit alongside the Bill, and that would change the process, is unnecessary. Those are my conclusions, based on what has been another very interesting discussion.

  • 5 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Nineteeth sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    I apologise, but I thought my hon. Friend said that they did not have capacity.

  • 5 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Nineteeth sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    I congratulate my hon. Friend on tabling amendment 1 on the amendment paper—a lot has happened since he tabled that amendment, it is fair to say. I get the impression from the Committee that we will all be voting in favour of making it compulsory to refer to a psychiatrist when one of the doctors feels there is a need to. Is my hon. Friend somewhat reassured by that?

Published records only — not a full account of an MP’s work. How we work →