Naz Shah MP: speeches 2025

478 published records · newest first.

Speeches

12 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Tenth sitting) · Hansard source
More
To come back to an earlier point—I want to make these points, simply because it is really important that we get them on the record—my hon. Friend the Member for Rother Valley talked about undue influence and encouragement perhaps being archaic terminology. However, just last year, the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 cited undue influence, as did the Anatomy Act 1984. Acts passed by Parliament in the last few years have used that terminology, so does the hon. Member for East Wiltshire share my concern about the resistance to having those words added to this Bill?
11 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source
More
I am struggling with this, because it is clear from the evidence from our witnesses that that is the case where somebody has anorexia, for example, and they make that choice. As has been referred to plenty of times in the context of the Bill, the Mental Capacity Act has been used, and is sufficiently used, for people to withdraw treatment. Personally, I think that that is a pretty false equivalence, because when a person’s life support machine is turned off, the decision is made not by the person receiving lifesaving treatment, but by their loved ones. According to what we have heard this morning, if someone has the mental capacity to use the MCA to withdraw treatment for a condition, that will lead to a diagnosis of terminal illness. It could kill someone. If I refused to take insulin, and I was diabetic, I would have the mental capacity to say, “Actually, I’m not going to take this treatment, so can I make a decision?” I am just trying to check the hon. Gentleman’s understanding.
11 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source
More
rose—
11 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source
More
I am just trying to understand what the hon. Member is communicating. Under the Bill, if somebody has anorexia, diabetes or kidney failure and has the capacity to make that decision because they meet the criteria for the capacity to refuse treatment, will that mean that they can decide to sign up to this option?
11 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source
More
Three psychiatrists gave evidence to the Committee in person: Professor Allan House, Dr Annabel Price, of the Royal College of Psychiatrists, and Professor Gareth Owen. All expressed doubts about the use of the Mental Capacity Act to assess whether a person was in a fit state of mind to undertake assisted dying. Does the hon. Lady agree that we should place great weight on the opinion of psychiatrists when assessing whether the Act should be used to assess applicants for assisted dying? It is a horse before the cart scenario, because the Act was not made for this context; when it was passed, we were not talking about the ability to choose to die.
11 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source
More
My hon. Friend made reference to that already being done, but where is the evidence that the capacity stage she talked about is actually happening? We had evidence from the Royal College of Psychiatrists and, as she said, Professor Chris Whitty. Where is the evidence that it is being done well, as things stand?
11 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Eighth sitting) · Hansard source
More
Further to that point of order, Ms McVey. My concern is about written evidence that has been submitted but not yet read—I have certainly not been through the last batch of evidence that we have had. How do we proceed when, for example, we might have gone through clauses 1 and 2, or even up to clause 4 or 5, and we receive evidence related to those clauses? We will have already discussed them in Committee. We have been told we will only get five hours on Report, while on Second Reading more than 100 MPs, including me, were unable to speak. The evidence could inform amendments. I am struggling to understand how this will be workable. I would value your advice.
11 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Ninth sitting) · Hansard source
More
My hon. Friend speaks to my point and the idea that the Act has been tried and tested. When we are talking about coercion, and capacity in relation to coercion, I come back to the point that we in this House have only just, in 2015 and 2021, made legislation using the word “coercion”. It was not recognised before. On the idea that this has been tried and tested for the last 20 years, I simply beg to differ. Coercion does come into the issue of capacity. We are looking at the Mental Capacity Act, which was introduced in 2005 and is 20 years old. These conversations were not being had in Parliament at that time; the vocabulary did not include “coercion” or “undue influence”, even at the time the Mental Capacity Act was passed by this House. Again, that speaks to my point: are we really saying that we want to test the Mental Capacity Act on something that has never been done before?
11 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Ninth sitting) · Hansard source
More
It would be if we were making treatment equitable, but if we apply the test of legality, and this is about pain—we have already seen the amendments tabled by the hon. Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough, which would widen the scope from six months to 12 months—where do we draw the line in terms of equity and legality? The Bill is open to a lot of legal challenges, and if we want to go down that route, there would be plenty of them.
11 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Ninth sitting) · Hansard source
More
The Minister makes an important point. I just want to understand something. He speaks on behalf of the Government and says that the Mental Capacity Act is an adequate legal base as it stands. Perhaps the issue is just that I am new to the process—I am happy to be guided, Sir Roger—but we have not had an impact assessment. Normally, Bills do have impact assessments beforehand and the Government go out to consult; they have a consultation process. None of that has happened because the Bill is a private Member’s Bill. I am just trying to understand: is what has been said still true? How do the Government come to that conclusion without all those robust mechanisms that would normally go before a Government Bill?
11 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Ninth sitting) · Hansard source
More
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his correction. To clarify, I do not think anybody in this House disagrees in principle with the idea of not letting people suffer. I am very much about principle, and I came to this Committee very much in that spirit. When I was asked to join this Committee, I had to sleep on it, and I now realise why. I am grateful for the interventions from my hon. Friends the Members for Rother Valley and for Ipswich. There are a couple of things that are important for us to understand. The Mental Capacity Act has not been tried in any of the other jurisdictions across the world on which we are basing this law, so we cannot make a comparison. On the issue of whether it is either/or—whether it is the Mental Capacity Act or the word “ability”—the Secretary of State has the power to change that. If we are to be true to the spirit in which we have come to this debate to make the Bill as safe as possible, given that so many psychiatrists and experts have said that they are not convinced that the Mental Capacity Act is fit for purpose in this regard, surely it is incumbent on us to make that case.
11 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Ninth sitting) · Hansard source
More
The hon. Member for East Wiltshire answered that question eloquently earlier. Although the outcome is the same, we are asking two different questions. The question is not about turning off and unplugging a machine; it is about whether someone will take drugs to end their life.
11 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Ninth sitting) · Hansard source
More
I thank the hon. Member for his intervention, but we are not here legislating on anorexia; we are here legislating on the option of assisted death. I am trying to understand where he is going with that argument. It genuinely does not make sense to me.
11 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Ninth sitting) · Hansard source
More
I absolutely share those concerns, which is why I pressed the issue to a vote. As I have explained to my hon. Friend the Member for Spen Valley, I am grateful that the Royal College of Psychiatrists gave evidence. It said that the Mental Capacity Act “is not sufficient for the purposes of this Bill”. In oral evidence, Professor Jamilla Hussain, an expert in palliative care and health inequalities, highlighted an inequity in assessment using the Mental Capacity Act. She said that she does not think that “the Mental Capacity Act and safeguarding training are fit for purpose. For something like assisted dying, we need a higher bar—we need to reduce the variability in practice.” –– [ Official Report, Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Public Bill Committee, 29 January 2025; c. 199, Q260.] My hon. Friend the Member for Penistone and Stocksbridge mentioned the process in the Bill being repeated eight times, but I want to bring us back to the issue of capacity in relation to coercion. The Royal College of Psychiatrists said: “In any assessment of capacity, we must also consider whether a person is making the request because they consider that they are a burden or because they do not consider that they have access to effective treatments or good-quality palliative care. At a population level, palliative care, social care and mental health service provision may impact the demand” for an assisted dying service. Although I appreciate that we will debate this in greater detail later, on clauses relating to coercion, it relates to the issue of capacity. In her evidence to the Committee, Chelsea Roff, a specialist in eating disorders, said: “One thing I would like to highlight in our study is that all 60 people who died” by assisted dying after suffering from anorexia, who were mostly young women, “were found to have mental capacity to make the decision to end their life, so I worry that mental capacity will not be an effective safeguard to prevent people with eating disorders from qualifying under the Bill. I also note that Oregon and California, where I am from and where we have found cases, have an additional safeguard to mental capacity. That is, if there are any indications that the person might have a mental disorder, that person must be referred for a mental health assessment.” –– [ Official Report, Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Public Bill Committee, 29 January 2025; c. 141, Q177.]
11 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Ninth sitting) · Hansard source
More
I give way to my hon. Friend.
11 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Ninth sitting) · Hansard source
More
My understanding, when it concerns eating disorders and anorexia—let me get this right: are hon. Members trying to equate new clause 1 with that condition?
11 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Ninth sitting) · Hansard source
More
I think that the hon. Member’s intervention responds to some of the points of the right hon. Member for North West Hampshire. We have heard a lot about the equivalence of endings versus decisions. The example given earlier, of somebody pulling the plug because they did not want treatment any more, happens in very few cases. From my experience of working in the NHS and with disabled people, when people are at the end of life, their cases sometimes do end up in court in front of a judge. That may be because there is a difference of opinion—be it medical, between the family, to do with capacity, or whatever the issue is. We are removing that. My understanding is that the promoter of the Bill is removing the need for the judge and is proposing a panel, which is what I read in The Guardian earlier.
11 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Ninth sitting) · Hansard source
More
I give way to the hon. Gentleman first.
11 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Ninth sitting) · Hansard source
More
My hon. Friend is not wrong, in so far as there can be two truths. There is a truth, for me, that the Mental Capacity Act does not deliver what we need it to deliver, and that is the concern we have heard from people who have given us evidence. We have not talked about the word “ability”—as hon. Members have pointed out, it is not set out in law—so there is a conversation to be had. As my hon. Friend the Member for Spen Valley, the promoter of the Bill, clearly stated, this is about strengthening the Bill and bringing the best Bill to Parliament to give people a choice. That is what this is about.
11 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Ninth sitting) · Hansard source
More
The hon. Gentleman clearly has more recent experience of prisons than I have—thankfully. In closing, I will be supporting his amendments to protect people who are vulnerable in prison and people who are homeless.
11 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Ninth sitting) · Hansard source
More
I note that the Minister used the word “treatment” twice, but we are not talking about a treatment; we are talking about assisted death. I think someone mentioned earlier that it is a treatment, but it is not a treatment, is it? I would welcome his clarification on that.
11 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Ninth sitting) · Hansard source
More
I understand that perfectly well. On the idea of not giving people assisted dying, as the Bill stands, the category also includes people who decide to stop eating or taking insulin and people who decide not to go on dialysis. It includes a whole host of illnesses. If we are talking about the legal challenges, which my hon. Friend the Member for Stroud started with, the legal challenges for the Bill are vast as it stands.
11 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Ninth sitting) · Hansard source
More
I know that my hon. Friend comes from a mental health background and has worked as a professional in this area. I absolutely agree that we need to strengthen the Bill, which is why I will support the amendment. I feel that we must strengthen it because the Secretary of State can make some interventions.
11 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Ninth sitting) · Hansard source
More
The idea that it is the fundamental denial of a human right is not quite correct. We are talking about the denial of a provision in a Bill that has not come into law. It is a potential legal position; it is not necessarily a human right yet. If the Bill comes into force, at that point it becomes an option that could be denied. There are many prisoners. Prison serves many purposes, one of which is to reform. There will be many prisoners who go in there and get a degree in criminality because they are surrounded by other prisoners. There are people who make choices. In the first four weeks we should not have the conversation around assisted death in any case. I have tabled an amendment to that effect and will speak to it when we come to it. In the meantime, a person has an added layer of pressure if they are in prison. It does not mean that everybody is necessarily vulnerable from a starting position. I agree that there may be prisoners who are not vulnerable, but there is an added pressure if somebody is homeless or in prison, not having family or security, that would no doubt compound their mental health. Whether that is a slight or a large impact is for somebody else to assess, but as it is I support the amendment.
11 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Ninth sitting) · Hansard source
More
I will take this intervention and then address both points.

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