Kim Leadbeater MP: speeches 2025

499 published records · newest first.

Speeches

13 Jun 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source
More
I have nearly finished. I have had many such conversations over recent months with those who support the amendment, including with palliative care doctors, nurses, hospice staff, GPs, Hospice UK and Marie Curie. I thank them all for their constructive engagement with the Bill. I cannot imagine that anyone in this place is not truly grateful for the outstanding work done every day by the wonderful people working in palliative and end-of-life care in every one of our constituencies. Many of us, if not most of us, will have personal experience of the kindness and compassion that those people have shown to our own families and friends. But this is not an either/or conversation. Palliative and end-of-life care and assisted dying can and do work side by side to give terminally ill patients the care and choice that they deserve in their final days. Just as there should not be an either/or for dying people, there should also not be an either/or for us as legislators in having to choose between supporting assisted dying or other end-of-life choices. That is why I am supporting amendment 21: to ensure that in this place we channel our energies into supporting all options available to terminally ill people—something that I have always committed to do.
13 Jun 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source
More
I am afraid that I am going to have to make some progress, based on the number of Members who wish to speak today. I thank the hon. Member for West Worcestershire and the hon. Member for Reigate (Rebecca Paul) for working with me on amendment 73, and I am very pleased that they support it.
13 Jun 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source
More
I am going to make some progress, I am afraid. The Secretary of State must also consult providers of health and care services, including palliative and end-of-life care. I am really pleased that Hospice UK is supporting this amendment—it is very important that those voices are heard. The Secretary of State can also consult anyone else they feel to be appropriate, creating a flexible and holistic approach. Turning to devolution, this long-overdue reform would apply to England and Wales, which share a criminal justice system. Health is a devolved matter, of course, and I have recognised from the outset that the legislation must respect devolution. I am fully committed to observing the same conventions that the Government would if this were a Government Bill. I have worked with UK Government officials to ensure that the right steps are taken at the right time by the right people. I have engaged with colleagues in the Welsh Government—I met the Welsh Health Minister in Cardiff, and there have been ongoing detailed discussions between the two teams of Government officials to ensure the workability of the legislation in both jurisdictions, in line with the devolution settlement. Amendments 92 to 95 also ensure that the devolution settlement is respected and adhered to. I thank the right hon. Member for Dwyfor Meirionnydd (Liz Saville Roberts) and the hon. Member for Chesham and Amersham (Sarah Green), not only for their diligent work on the Bill Committee but for working with me on the amendments in relation to Wales, and I thank the Welsh Government for their guidance and support. I hope that colleagues across the House can support these new clauses and amendments. I now turn to new clause 21, which makes specific provision about the use of the Welsh language. The conversations that happen at the end of a person’s life are extremely personal and should be handled with the utmost sensitivity. It is very important that they are conducted in the best interests of the patient, and a big part of that is using clear communication. In this respect, language matters, so if a patient in Wales has Welsh as their first or preferred language, all efforts should be made to ensure they can communicate with voluntary assisted dying services in Welsh. I committed to this in Committee, and have made good on that commitment. Turning to amendments 76 and 77, as with any Bill, it is important that the amending legislation secures overall coherence with the statute book. As such, the clauses relating to medicines, advertising and employment protections amend, or confer power to amend, other legislation that currently extends to parts of the UK. Of course, this does not mean the provision of assisted dying, but, for example, they extend the prohibition on advertising to the whole of the UK and apply the employment protections in the Bill to Scotland. That is in line with the guidance I have received from legal experts, and as such I hope all colleagues can support these amendments. If the Bill passes, I will, if necessary, work with other devolved Administrations in the same way as I have worked with the Welsh Government to ensure that devolution is respected. That concludes the explanations of the amendments tabled in my name. Many colleagues are keen to speak, so I am not going to comment on all the amendments in the group; I will just make two comments about amendments that are not in my name, and allow other people plenty of time to speak. Amendment 42, tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Adam Jogee), would not only try to remove the backstop for the provision of assisted dying in England, but create a number of other issues in relation to commencement. If Parliament chooses to give this choice to terminally ill people, there cannot be a clause in the Bill that would prevent that from being available as soon as it was safe and practicable. But the amendment would remove the four-year backstop. It would also prevent the appointment of the voluntary assisted dying commissioner and create a potential commencement gap between England and Wales. Given that, I have been strongly advised that the amendment would create serious workability issues. I urge colleagues who want an operable Bill to join me in rejecting the amendment. To finish, I am pleased to support amendment 21, tabled by the hon. Member for Twickenham (Munira Wilson). I thank her for her engagement with the Bill and the amendment, which would require the Secretary of State to prepare and publish an assessment of the availability, quality and distribution of palliative and end-of-life care, as part of the first report on the implementation of the Act, mirroring the assessment already required as part of the five-year review. Although the Bill seeks to address what in some respects is a very specific issue in terms of the failings of the current law, it has become part of a much-needed broader conversation about death, dying and end-of-life care. We all have our own experiences of death, loss and grief, and we do not talk about them enough. I am really pleased that the Bill has led to many conversations up and down the country; whatever our views, that has to be a positive thing.
13 Jun 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source
More
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his constructive engagement, but he did not vote for the Bill when it included a High Court judge, and now he is trying to reintroduce a High Court judge. Is there a version of the Bill that he would vote for if it had some sort of judicial oversight other than a commissioner who is a judge or a retired judge, a deputy commissioner who is a judge or a retired judge, and someone on the panel who is a legal expert?
13 Jun 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source
More
My hon. Friend is making a powerful point, and there is consensus across the House about banning the advertising of assisted dying services. His amendment, though, would be slightly limited in that it makes just two exceptions. There would probably need to be a broader piece of work on that, but I commit to working with him if he is interested.
13 Jun 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source
More
I thank my hon. Friend for sharing her expertise, along with other colleagues with medical backgrounds who have worked with me on this amendment.
13 Jun 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source
More
I thank the hon. Gentleman for the intervention, although I am not sure that it is relevant to the banning of advertising for assisted dying services, which I will try to stay focused on.
13 Jun 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source
More
I have taken legal advice from Government officials to ensure that devolution is respected at every stage in proceedings. Where legislation that affects other jurisdictions needs to be amended, those conversations have already started and will continue.
2 Jun 2025 · Decriminalising Abortion · Hansard source
More
I thank my hon. and learned Friend for introducing this important debate. Does he agree that at the heart of this discussion are some key principles, such as compassion, which he mentioned, as well as choice and bodily autonomy? Whatever stage we are at in our lives, it is important that we are allowed to make choices about our own bodies, free from the fear of criminalisation or judgment.
16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source
More
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that intervention. The civil servants are clearly neutral on the issue. They certainly have not expressed any opinions on the content of the Bill. They have merely provided the technical advice and expertise, and they have done so brilliantly in that regard. New clause 10, amendment 52 and new schedule 1 are tabled in my name. As well as correcting the injustices in the legal situation, one key tenet of this Bill is choice for dying people, but it is also important that there is choice for doctors and other healthcare professionals and, indeed, anyone else. The Bill was always clear that: “No registered medical practitioner or other health professional is under any duty…to participate in the provision of assistance in accordance with this Act”, but new clause 10 expands that protection. It broadens the people to whom it applies and the functions to which it relates. New schedule 1 makes provision for enforcement of this right “not to be subjected to any detriment” in connection with the Bill.
16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source
More
I thank the hon. Gentleman for that point. The eligibility criteria in this Bill are very different from those in the jurisdictions he mentions—people with mental health conditions are not eligible for assisted dying under the provisions of this Bill.
16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source
More
There is absolutely nothing in the Bill that has any suggestion that any funding would be impacted by whatever decisions organisations make around assisted dying. I will make some progress. New clause 10(1) states clearly: “No person is under any duty to participate in the provision of assistance in accordance with this Act.” That is something I feel strongly on a personal level. If people do not want to be involved, they should not have to be involved, and those who do, should. Subsection (5) covers pharmacists and pharmacy technicians and new schedule 1 provides comprehensive employment protections, so I hope that whatever colleagues’ views are on assisted dying, they will see the value of these changes and support them.
16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source
More
I will just finish this point, because it is very important. I acknowledge the concerns that colleagues have expressed around this issue, and I believe they are the motivation behind amendment 14. As I have set out, I think that risk is negligible. I have taken advice, and there is some concern that clinicians might have difficulty assessing with certainty that the decision to stop eating and eating was the only reason for a person’s terminal prognosis; as such, some further drafting changes may be required in the other place if this amendment should pass. With that in mind, however, and to ensure there is no sort of loophole, no matter how small the reality is of there being one, I am happy to support this amendment today.
16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source
More
I will keep going, if I may, because I think I have been fairly fair. Amendment 78 ensures that all three members of the panel must agree before a certificate of eligibility is issued, so abstentions cannot result in approval. The amendment came about as a result of discussions in Committee. It is really important to clarify that when the panel of experts is doing its work, its decision must be unanimous for a certificate of eligibility to be granted and for the patient to proceed. If a panel member abstains, no certificate of eligibility can be granted to the person. Schedule 2 also sets out that the panel must give reasons for its decision in each case. This is really important. Amendment 79 ensures that those reasons—the reasons for the panel’s decision—are communicated in writing in a document to the person to whom the referral in question relates, the co-ordinating doctor and the commissioner. This creates clear channels of communication and will enable those people to fully understand the expert panel’s decisions.
16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source
More
I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention. That was a very powerful point, if slightly long. There are people who face these really traumatic and difficult decisions every day, including Louise Shackleton, who I believe is also with us today.
16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source
More
I do indeed, Mr Speaker; you are absolutely right. The amendments that we are discussing today build on some of the work of the Committee, and I think that is important. We took a lot of steps to strengthen the Bill in Committee, and I was pleased to work collaboratively with colleagues in that way. As I come on to the amendments, which have been tabled in my name, let me say that the Government are, of course, neutral on the issue of assisted dying, but have always been clear that workability is essential if the Bill is to pass. I have worked closely with an outstanding team of civil servants from the Department of Health and Social Care and the Ministry of Justice, and it is with their technical advice on making the Bill workable and giving coherence to the statute book that I propose these amendments today.
16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source
More
The hon. Gentleman makes an important point. The amendment is not specifically about eating disorders; there is a broader context. I will come to that later. It is with that experience in mind—my own personal experience and having spoken to many colleagues on this issue—that I say now, as I said in Committee, that under the Bill as it stands, having anorexia would not qualify a person to be eligible for an assisted death. The Bill is clear that a person cannot be considered terminally ill on the basis only of a mental disorder. Clause 2 makes it clear that a person must have an inevitably progressive illness or disease that cannot be reversed by treatment. Anorexia is a serious mental health condition that is not inevitably progressive and can, thankfully, be reversed by treatment. Of course, at every stage of the assisted dying process the patient must be found to have capacity to make the decision, and this is checked repeatedly throughout the process. Someone with severe anorexia would be highly unlikely to be assessed to have capacity to make a decision on assisted dying. The other tragic reality is that if a patient was so ill as a result of not eating and drinking for whatever reason, they would die before the process of assisted dying was able to take place, as it could take up to two months to complete all the stages of the process as set out in the Bill, and the latest clinical guidance states that the general range of survival once voluntary stopping of eating and drinking has begun is between seven and 21 days. Stopping eating and drinking also leads to a range of symptoms that would make meaningful conversations, as required by the Bill, impossible. Having said that, I know that some people have expressed concerns that the severe physical consequences of a decision to stop eating or drinking could still enable someone to claim eligibility for assisted dying when they would not otherwise be able to do so, and I believe that is the motivation behind amendment 14.
16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source
More
I will just make some progress, if I may. It is about not just patient choice but choice for professional people, too. We know there are a range of views on assisted dying across a range of professions. I have always been clear that no one who is uncomfortable taking part should have to, and nor should there be any detriment to anyone, whatever choice they make in whatever role they have.
16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source
More
I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention. I have not seen those comments, but it is absolutely right that whatever our views are on this issue, we must remain respectful. I also want to thank colleagues here in Parliament—MPs and indeed staff—who have shared their personal stories of loss with me over recent months. This is a really important point: these are real people with real stories, and they must always be at the heart of the debate. Public support for assisted dying in this country has been consistently high for a long time now, and we have seen movement in jurisdictions around the world, including just this week in Scotland. I congratulate colleagues in Holyrood, particularly Liam McArthur MSP, for holding such a compassionate and respectful debate, which I hope we can emulate today. It is right that we consider this change with great care, as we are doing today. But we should also remember, as with other big social changes such as giving women bodily autonomy on their reproductive rights or allowing gay—
16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source
More
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. We keep coming back to the word “choice”. It is about choice for patients and terminally ill people, but it is also about choice for medical professionals and others. Because of the unintended consequences, I cannot support amendment (a), but I am confident that new clause 10 and new schedule 1 provide robust protections for employees, regardless of their choices about participating in the provision of assisted dying services.
16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source
More
I will make some progress, if I may. This is essentially about providing flexibility for doctors while ensuring continuity of care for patients, and I hope colleagues can support new clause 11.
16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source
More
I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source
More
The patient could request information, but so could doctors and other healthcare professionals. It would be wrong if people were not allowed to share that information if it was requested, even if their employer did not want them to do it. I turn now to new clause 11 and consequential amendments 64 and 65, which will ensure that the Bill is workable by making provision about the replacement of the co-ordinating doctor or the independent doctor where they are unable or unwilling to continue to carry out their functions in the Bill. The doctor may be ill or on holiday, retire, or have a change of personal circumstances.
16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source
More
I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention. The Royal College of Psychiatrists has a neutral position on the issue of assisted dying. If we refer to the impact— [ Interruption. ] Yes, it does.
16 May 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill · Hansard source
More
I will take one final intervention.

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