Kim Leadbeater MP: speeches

Speeches

• 19 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-seventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move amendment 504, in clause 24, page 15, line 11, leave out from second “of” to end of line 12 and insert “— (a) providing assistance to a person to end their own life in accordance with this Act, or performing any other function under this Act in accordance with this Act, or (b) assisting a person seeking to end their own life in accordance with this Act, in connection with the doing of anything under this Act.”. This amendment provides that it is not an offence to perform a function under the Bill, or to assist a person seeking to end their own life, in connection with the doing of anything under the Bill.

• 19 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-seventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I will speak briefly about amendments 485 and 521, on which I will respectfully disagree—not for the first time—with the hon. Member for East Wiltshire. I believe the negative procedure is perfectly adequate in matters of this kind. We had a similar debate the other day. I will also speak to amendments 442 and 445 in the name of my hon. Friend the Member for York Central. Although I take on board the comments of the Minister about time pressures, I am minded to support both these amendments. Regulations are important and I have no problem with placing the duty on the Secretary of State in those two instances.

• 19 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-seventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  These amendments relate to criminal liability under the Bill. They get to the heart of why the legislation is needed. Amendment 504 seeks to clarify the language of clause 24 and provide reassurance that it will not be considered an offence to perform a function under the provisions of the Bill or to assist a person seeking to end their own life in connection with anything done under the Bill. It will ensure that those acting within the law, and with compassion, to assist terminally ill individuals who wish to end their suffering and take control at the end of their life are protected under the law. Amendment 505 ensures that the provisions of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Act 2025 will supersede the Suicide Act 1961, providing clarity that actions taken under the new Act will not be subject to the outdated legal framework established under the 1961 Act. That is a crucial step in modernising our laws to reflect the values of compassion, dignity and personal autonomy. These amendments bring us closer to a legal framework that is clear and safe. Our Prime Minister, my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Holborn and St Pancras (Keir Starmer), the former Director of Public Prosecutions, stated in relation to assisted dying, “The law must reflect the changing moral landscape of society, and in cases such as this, where the individual’s autonomy and suffering are at stake, our legal framework must offer clarity and compassion.” During his tenure as DPP, Sir Keir also emphasised the importance of not criminalising individuals who act out of compassion, particularly in difficult and morally complex situations. He said, “The law must be clear, and it must ensure that those who act with the intention to relieve suffering are not penalised, as long as their actions are in accordance with the law.” That sentiment is echoed in the amendments before us today, which ensure that those who assist individuals under the Bill are protected by law, offering clarity and reassurance to both the public and professionals who may be involved in such decisions. Sir Max Hill, another former Director of Public Prosecutions, remarked in 2019, “The law around assisted dying is often unclear and creates a great deal of uncertainty for both individuals and healthcare professionals. What we need is a system that balances compassion with protection, ensuring that people who are at their most vulnerable are supported in a way that is both legal and ethical.” Sir Max Hill’s words emphasise the need for clear, compassionate guidance, which these amendments will provide. They will help to eliminate the legal uncertainty that can cause fear and hesitation in those who act in the best interests of individuals facing terminal illness. The 2010 DPP policy clarified that assisting someone to end their life was not automatically criminal and that each case would be assessed on its individual facts. However, that has not changed the law and many people are still being failed by the law as it stands. These amendments create clarity and prevent ambiguity around what constitutes a criminal act versus an action legally protected by the new law. I will finish with a very powerful testimony from Louise Shackleton from Scarborough. Louise accompanied her husband to Dignitas last December. I believe she was the first person to make that trip since Second Reading. Louise talks about the trip she made to Switzerland with her husband. She says: “This is not an easy process as some against Assisted Dying might have you believe, might try and convince you. It is a robust and thorough almost an ordeal in itself. Then there is the cost, not just financially but mentally and physically as he had to be able to get to Zurich and someone had to assist him to do this…My husband did not deserve this to be his end nor did I deserve this to be his end, my last memory of him…I accompanied my husband to Switzerland, where we had 4 wonderful days together, my husband’s mood had lifted, he was at peace, it was as if the weight of the world had been lifted from his shoulders. He was not scared, no anxiety, his emotional suffering had ceased. You cannot imagine unless you see and feel this he was looking forward to his peaceful death, looking forward to leaving his pain, suffering…At the end, my husband was able to die on his own terms, pain-free and peaceful, held in my arms as his heart gently slowed and finally stopped, granting him the dignified and serene farewell that he had wished for. But where was I? alone in a strange country alone, scared, bereft, organising an Uber to take me away from the…Dignitas House, I was vulnerable and in utter shock, now having to leave my dead husband alone, leave his body to be cared for by people I had never met…Due to our draconian laws my husband had to be in a foreign country, had to be cremated to be brought back home. No funeral that he would have chosen, no mourners, no ceremony, cremated with no Reverend to pray for him, returned to me in a cardboard box. The pain is excruciating beyond any other loss I have experienced”. She then says: “I have been arrested and spent just under three hours being interviewed by two CID officers. Four days after my husband left my world there I was stuck in a Police station being cautioned, questioned, having to relive my trauma, for my crime, a crime made by love, a crime made by adoration, a crime of compassion and respect of my husband’s last wish.” She now faces a prolonged police investigation. She tells us, “My husband was the first British person to go to Dignitas after parliament debated on Friday 29 th Of November 2024. You have the power, the power is yours to be human, to follow Gods wish, to ‘suffer’ choices that other people may make even if its uncomfortable for you. Palliative care I hear you say, My Husband did not want palliative care…Please give others the gift of dignity and a good death in their homes…You have the power to do something amazing, give people the choice.” I commend these amendments, which will help many people. Sadly, it is too late for Louise, but they will help many other families who will potentially go through what she has been through.

• 19 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-seventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you, Chair, and apologies. I thank the Minister for the intervention and I think she did make the point that needed to be made.

• 19 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-seventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend the hon. Member for Penistone and Stocksbridge has made a powerful and passionate case for the provision of independent advocates, and, as always, has done an outstanding job of advocating for people with disabilities, including learning disabilities, mental disorders and autism, as she has done throughout this entire process. It is essential that anybody considering the choice at the end of life made possible by this Bill should fully understand the nature and consequences of any decision they may make. These amendments have made me reflect on comments—I think made by the hon. Member for East Wiltshire a few weeks ago—about the purpose of the Bill. He proposed that the Bill is either about choice and autonomy or it is about safeguards. Actually, this group presents very clear evidence that it is and must be about both, and I hope he can support the amendments. I take on board the Minister’s comments. I heard an element of caution from him, and I am happy to work with the Government and my hon. Friend the Member for Penistone and Stocksbridge if there are any further requirements prior to Report stage, but I am very happy to support the amendment and the new clause.

• 19 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-seventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I thought we were going to get a full house with this group, but let us have a look. I am minded to support amendment 447, as I have previously said. I will wait to hear from the Minister the impact that that will have on amendment 523.

• 19 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-seventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  That is very helpful indeed. In that case I am very pleased to support amendment 523 in the name of the hon. Member for East Wiltshire as well. I am also minded to support amendment 394 in the name of my hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford, which I think is very sensible, like his other amendments that I have supported. I am not sure that amendment 534 in the name of my hon. Friend the Member for Ipswich is entirely necessary, but I fully understand the sentiment and therefore I am minded to support that amendment as well. That brings me on to the final amendment, 448. I wanted to support this amendment, but I have taken on board the Minister’s comments on the lack of clarity about what it means to be registered and qualified. As such, I cannot support that amendment this evening, but I think we could look at coming up with something on Report that would achieve the objective that my hon. Friend the Member for York Central intended. Amendment 447 agreed to. Amendment made: 394, in clause 30, page 18, line 24, at end insert— “(ba) the provision of information and support to persons with learning disabilities who are eligible to request assistance to end their own life under this Act, including the role of advocates for such persons;”— (Daniel Francis .) Amendment made: 416, in clause 30, page 18, line 25, leave out paragraph (c).— (Jack Abbott.) This amendment is linked to Amendment 417. Amendment made: 430, in clause 30, page 18, line 30, at end insert— “(da) responding to unexpected complications that arise in relation to the administration of the approved substance under section 18, including when the procedure fails;”.— (Daniel Francis.)

• 19 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-seventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I thank my hon. Friend for that. Unless the Minister has anything to add on injunctions—

• 19 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-seventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I understand the sentiment behind the amendment, but as the Minister said, codes of practice serve a particular purpose. Everyone has to comply with and abide by the law, but codes of practice are there to assist in the exercise of a person’s professional judgment. I worry about losing the ability for professionally trained and regulated people to use their professional discretion and have the flexibility they need to do their jobs well, if we accepted this amendment. I think the hon. Member for East Wiltshire answered his own question in his description of what a code of practice does. Although the amendment comes from a good place, I cannot support it. We need to have flexibility, and trust in our professionals to do their job.

• 19 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-seventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move amendment 506, in clause 26, page 16, line 7, leave out “in accordance with” and insert “under”. This amendment provides that the offence under subsection (2) applies in relation to an approved substance provided under the Bill.

• 19 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-seventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  These amendments relate to the falsification or destruction of documentation and are very straightforward. Amendment 510 makes a drafting change to align the wording of subsection (1)(b) with wording used elsewhere in the clause. Amendments 511 and 512 clarify that the offence under subsection (2) relates only to an opinion about a matter relating to a function under the Bill rather than to the person. Amendment 513 clarifies the scope of the offence under subsection (3) by providing that the offence occurs where a doctor fails to comply with a notification or recording obligation in relation to the cancelling of a first or second declaration. The amendments significantly improve the clarity, scope and precision of the offences in clause 27, align it with the language used in the rest of the Bill and ensure that it is more consistent. They refine the original provisions, focusing on serious misconduct and offences covered by the clause.

• 19 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-seventh sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I have nothing to add.

• 19 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-sixth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is a good point. My understanding—the Minister might correct me—is that pharmacists currently are within the definition of health professionals, but if they are not, that is an important point, which would be covered by making the change to ensure that no one is under any duty. However, I will definitely check that. Mr Porter also said: “hospices evolved out of the community. They exist because communities wanted better deaths. In the end, it is the job of institutions to evolve to fit the values and laws of society as they evolve, rather than vice versa.” –– [ Official Report, Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Public Bill Committee, 29 January 2025; c. 202, Q264.] The polling on assisted dying shows significant public support for a change in the law, which is one of the main reasons we are here discussing the issue today. The latest figures from the British social attitudes survey, published just this week by the National Centre for Social Research, show that support at 79%, which is unchanged or slightly up on a decade ago. Although I cannot support these amendments, this is an important debate. I think we have conducted ourselves extremely well over the past 24 hours. I think it is important that we continue the debate respectfully and sensitively.

• 19 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-sixth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is not sudden!

• 19 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-sixth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman makes a good point, and I am aware of the Minister’s comments. This will be part of the discussion as we take it forward. That is why this debate is really powerful. In their written evidence, the trustees at Willow Burn hospice, based in the UK, told us: “Our Mission is to deliver hospice care of the highest standard to our patients and those important to them...We also believe that we should support and enable people to make the choices that matter to them.” They said they had not decided their position on assisted dying and remained “open minded about possible future actions. We believe this stance is in the best interests of patients and their families and reflects the wishes of our community.” I welcome that open-minded approach and their commitment “to put care, compassion and dignity at the heart of everything” they do. Contrary to what the hon. Member East Wiltshire has said, the picture is not black and white. I agree with my hon. Friend the Member for Ipswich in that regard. Colleagues may remember the evidence given to the Committee by the CEO of Hospice UK, Toby Porter. He clarified for us that institutions do not function in the same way as individuals when it comes to conscience-influencing decisions. He told us: “There is this idea that your individual opinion guides everything, but with a hospice charity the opposite is true. As many Members will know because of their own work as trustees, the trustees and leadership of a hospice team are required to put personal opinion and interest to one side and always act in the best interest of the charity’s beneficiaries, who are the population.” –– [ Official Report, Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Public Bill Committee, 29 January 2025; c. 195, Q255.] It is also important to remember that international experience shows that up to 30% to 40% of patients who sign up to the assisted dying process ultimately do not access it. Palliative care may meet their needs, or they may simply change their mind. However, we also know that the reassurance and comfort that the choice of an assisted death provides alongside other treatment and care is really important to them, and I do not believe that reassurance should be denied to some people because of the institution they happen to be in.

• 19 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-sixth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The right hon. Gentleman makes an important point. The word that we have used a lot—maybe not enough in some respects—is choice. That is important for individuals, but it is important for institutions as well. Putting an institutional opt-out in the Bill would risk creating confusion and distress for patients and their loved ones, and indeed for staff and volunteers.

• 19 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-sixth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Thank you for stepping into the breach this morning, Ms McVey. Clause 23 provides that there will be no obligation on medical practitioners and health professionals to provide assistance as set out in the assisted dying process. We know doctors and other health professionals hold a variety of views on assisted dying. A significant number are in support of what this Bill sets out to do, and the experience from other jurisdictions is that that number increases once it is seen to be working safely and effectively in practice. Others, of course, would object to being involved at any stage and I am very respectful of that. The Bill is about giving terminally ill people choice and autonomy, but it is absolutely right that the principle of autonomy is extended to registered medical practitioners, health professionals and others. As such, I turn to amendment 480. I agree with the intention behind the amendment—nobody should have a duty to be involved with the provision of assistance in accordance with the legislation—and I think there is consensus across the Committee on that. However, I am concerned about the drafting of the amendment, the lack of clarity around being directly or indirectly in the provision of assistance, and the framing of the selective list of activities. I fear that the amendment could have unintended consequences and an impact on continuity of care, and I take on board the Minister’s comments about the significant legal uncertainty that that would create. I therefore cannot support the amendment as drafted but, as I have said, I am happy to work with the hon. Member for East Wiltshire to consider an alternative amendment that would better achieve the aim of ensuring that no one has an obligation to take part in the assisted dying process.

• 19 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-sixth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Lady is absolutely right to acknowledge the wonderful workforce working in end of life care, but there is a range of views within that workforce and there is the individual opt-out. No one has to be involved in this process if they do not want to be. That is clear in the Bill as it stands. I hope that, working together, we can make that even clearer if needed. Under the Bill, doctors and health professionals already have the ability to opt out for any reason, wherever they work.

• 18 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move amendment 479, in clause 17, page 11, line 37, leave out “at” and insert “with”. This amendment clarifies that a cancellation may be given to a practitioner with the person’s GP practice.

• 18 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Does the Minister agree that it will be on the record that we have had this conversation, and that many of us—including myself—have expressed our concerns about the concept of good standing in the community? I would like to think that that will be taken into consideration.

• 18 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  My point was that I think amendment 411 has been withdrawn.

• 18 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I commend the amendment to the Committee. Amendment 479 agreed to. Clause 17, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 18 Provision of assistance Amendment made: 378, in clause 18, page 12, line 9, leave out paragraph (a) and insert— “(a) a certificate of eligibility has been granted in respect of a person,”. —(Kim Leadbeater.) This amendment is consequential on NC21.

• 18 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is making a really sensible point and a fair argument, and I am very happy to support the amendment.

• 18 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The amendments are designed to streamline the drafting of the Bill. Taken together, they create a new definition of a recordable event, namely those events set out in clause 16(1), where declarations and statements are required at any stage of the process. We can all agree that record keeping is essential, so it is necessary to define the events that should be recorded. I commend the amendments to the Committee.

• 18 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-fourth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I hope that these are a couple of nice, simple amendments. The right of the patient to cancel at any time is obviously really important. It is also important that, for the purpose of monitoring and reporting the process, the commissioner, as proposed, is kept informed at every stage. I hope that the whole Committee can see the necessity of these amendments.