In this first "mini pod" of a series exploring one of the most controversial bills currently before Parliament — the proposed legislation to legalise assisted dying — Ruth Fox and Mark D’Arcy delve into the heated debates surrounding the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill. This Private Member’s Bill has already ignited passionate discussions during its first Public Bill Committee sitting.
Ruth shares her first-hand account of attending the Committee’s initial meeting, where disagreements over procedural matters — such as whether to hold private discussions about witness lists and sitting times — set a combative tone for what promises to be a challenging legislative journey.
Together, Mark and Ruth unpack the unique hurdles faced by this Private Member’s Bill. Unlike government-sponsored legislation, it lacks co-ordination by party Whips, leaving MPs to navigate disputes independently. One major point of contention? The selection of witnesses, which has sparked accusations of bias. From the Royal College of Psychiatrists to international experts, the process of choosing who gets to testify has become a lightning rod for criticism.
Adding to the intrigue, the Government claims it is ‘neutral’ on the issue, leaving it to Parliament to decide. But how neutral is it really? Ministers on the Public Bill Committee participated in a key division, raising questions about their impartiality. And by tabling a money motion to fund the Bill’s implementation — despite uncertainty over the potential costs — have Ministers signed a blank cheque? And when will MPs and the public see an Impact Assessment?
With emotions running high, this debate — focused on profound life-and-death decisions — is set to dominate parliamentary discourse in the weeks ahead. Join us as we navigate the complexities of this contentious and deeply personal piece of legislation.
Hansard Society
Please note, this transcript is automatically generated. There may consequently be minor errors and the text is not formatted according to our style guide. If you wish to reference or cite the transcript copy below, please first check against the audio version above.
[00:00:00] Intro: You are listening to Parliament Matters, a Hansard Society production, supported by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust. Learn more at hansardsociety.org.uk/PM.
[00:00:16] Ruth Fox: Welcome to Parliament Matters, the podcast about the institution at the heart of our democracy, Parliament itself. I'm Ruth Fox.
[00:00:23] Mark D'Arcy: And I'm Mark D'Arcy. And welcome to our first mini pod in a series dedicated to the most controversial law currently before Parliament, the bill to legalise assisted dying.
[00:00:34] Ruth Fox: Yes, the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill is about to begin detailed scrutiny by a Public Bill Committee and even the preliminaries have been ominously difficult.
[00:00:49] Mark D'Arcy: And Ruth, you actually went along to that first Public Bill Committee sitting, not completely sure whether as a member of the general public you were even going to be allowed in because sometimes these preliminaries are conducted in private session rather than letting us members of the general public in.
[00:01:04] Ruth Fox: Yes, I mean there'd been speculation that it was going to be in private session, but it said on the parliamentary website it was public. I happened to be over there for another meeting earlier in the House of Lords, so I thought well, I'll pop my head in and see what's happening. So I went in and the public gallery was full, so 20-odd people sat at the back, and a very full turnout from the Committee.
[00:01:23] But I think it's fair to say the first skirmishes were somewhat tense.
[00:01:27] Mark D'Arcy: Yeah, I mean, the issue, first of all, dividing the Committee, was whether or not they should discuss the list of witnesses they were going to take in their first few hearings, because they're going to spend three days next week on taking evidence from witnesses, people like the British Medical Association, witnesses from countries where assisted dying has been legalised and they have all sorts of jurisdictions New Zealand, Australia, and the debate there was should they go into private session so that they could say things like oh such and such hasn't responded yet to our inquiries about whether they would give evidence. Or such and such just blathers and we'd rather have someone who's a bit more lucid. Those kind of discussions, which as I say, normally happen in private between the so called Usual Channels The government Whips and the opposition Whips normally agree these things in advance when it's a government bill. But this, of course, is not a government bill.
Use the links below to subscribe to the Hansard Society's Parliament Matters podcast on your preferred app, or search for 'Parliament Matters' on whichever podcasting service you use. If you are unable to find our podcast, please email us here.
In our latest ‘Whipping Yarn’, we talk with Simon Hart, former Conservative Chief Whip during Rishi Sunak’s Premiership. Hart opens up about his time in one of Westminster’s most demanding and discreet roles, chronicled in his new book, ‘Ungovernable: The Political Diaries of a Chief Whip’.
If a crisis or major national event occurs during a period when Parliament is adjourned, there are often demands from MPs, the media and the public for Parliament to be ‘recalled’. But the House of Commons Standing Orders stipulate that only Government Ministers - in reality, the Prime Minister - can ask the Speaker to recall the House. In recent years the House of Lords has generally been recalled at the same time as the House of Commons.
In response to the Modernisation Committee's call for views on 17 October 2024, we submitted evidence outlining key areas we believe the Committee should prioritise. Our submission recommended a focus on: strengthening legislative scrutiny, with particular emphasis on reforming the delegated legislation system; enhancing financial scrutiny, especially in relation to the Budget and the Estimates; addressing strategic gaps in parliamentary scrutiny; making more effective use of parliamentary time; and reviewing the Standing Orders, language and rituals of the House of Commons.
This briefing explains what to watch for during the Second Reading debate of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill on 29 November. It outlines the procedural and legislative issues that will come into play: the role of the Chair in managing the debate and how procedures such as the 'closure' and 'reasoned amendments' work. It looks ahead to the Committee and Report stage procedures that will apply if the Bill progresses beyond Second Reading. It also examines the government's responsibilities, such as providing a money resolution for the Bill and preparing an Impact Assessment, while addressing broader concerns about the adequacy of Private Members’ Bill procedures for scrutinising controversial issues.
In this ninth instalment of our special mini-podcast series, we continue to explore the latest developments in the progress of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, often referred to as the assisted dying bill. We are joined by Dr Marie Tidball MP to discuss the amendments she has secured for a Disability Advisory Board and an independent advocate for people with learning disabilities.
