In this sixth instalment of our special mini-podcast series, we continue to track the progress of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, which seeks to legalise assisted dying in England and Wales. This episode looks into developments in the Bill Committee this week, where scrutiny of the legislation has intensified. And we speak with Professor Colin Gavaghan about how New Zealand legislated for assisted dying.
In this episode, we track the latest developments in the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill Committee, where scrutiny has intensified. We discuss the pace of the Committee’s progress, the dynamics between supporters and opponents of the Bill, and a key upcoming vote on the clause which proposes shifting oversight from High Court judges to an expert panel. Could this amendment sway MPs who previously supported the Bill?
Later, we turn to New Zealand, where assisted dying has been legal for over three years. Professor Colin Gavaghan, from the University of Bristol, shares insights into New Zealand’s experience, exploring eligibility criteria, operational challenges, and the emotional toll on medical professionals. What lessons can the UK learn from their legislative approach and the assisted dying system itself.
Professor Colin Gavaghan
Colin Gavaghan is a Professor at Bristol Digital Futures Institute and at the Law School at the University of Bristol. His research interests include the analysis of legal, ethical and policy issues around new technologies, as well as medical and criminal law. He has published widely on end-of-life issues and was an expert witness in Seales v Attorney General, the leading New Zealand case on assisted dying. Formerly the first Director of the New Zealand Law Foundation Centre for Law and Policy in Emerging Technologies at the University of Otago, he was also Deputy Chair of the New Zealand’s statutory Advisory Committee on Assisted Reproductive Technology.
Colin Gavaghan
‘Capacity and Assisted Dying’, chapter in Cholbi, M. J. (2017), Euthanasia and Assisted Suicide: Global Views on Choosing to End Life (Santa Barbara, California: Praeger), p. 299.
Written evidence to the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill Public Bill Committee (with Isabella Lewis), 14 February 2025
‘Assisted Dying Bill: Why the challenge for MPs is not a lack of information’, University of Bristol Law School blog, 28 November 2024
Hansard Society
Parliament
Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: Bill documents
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] Speaker: You are listening to Parliament Matters, a Hansard Society production, supported by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust. Learn more at hansardsociety.org.uk.
[00:00:17] Ruth Fox: Welcome to Parliament Matters, the podcast about the institution at the heart of our democracy, Parliament itself. I'm Ruth Fox.
[00:00:24] Mark D'Arcy: And I'm Mark D'Arcy and welcome to the latest in our special series of mini podcasts tracing the progress of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, the bill that aims to legalise assisted dying in England and Wales.
[00:00:37] In a moment we'll be looking at events in a jurisdiction that's had an assisted dying system for three years, New Zealand, and the lessons it might have for the system in this country. But first Ruth, there's been quite a lot of interesting action in the bill committee that's ploughing through the details of the bill at the moment.
[00:00:52] Ruth Fox: Yes, I mean the pace has quickened a bit. Notably, there have been various comments at different stages from Kim Leadbeater and others keeping an eye on the clock, almost, you know, noting that we need to make progress and so on. And I think they have made a little bit more progress than previous weeks.
[00:01:09] They're getting through things a little bit quicker, partly because it does appear as if some of the MPs who are supportive of the bill are making fewer interventions or shorter interventions. possibly to keep things moving along at a quicker pace.
[00:01:22] Mark D'Arcy: And that's a fairly classic kind of thing that happens when time is running short.
[00:01:27] The supporters of a proposition often almost disengage, let the other side make its debating points, but don't fire back at anything like the normal rate, just so that they don't take up time. It's something you often see, for example, in debates in the Commons Chamber on Private Members Bills.
[00:01:44] Ruth Fox: Yeah, I mean, it's important to stress this bill is getting more scrutiny than any recent Private Member's Bill, I can recall. And actually more scrutiny than quite a lot of Government bills, I can recall as well. So when we talk about the pressure of time and running short of time and so on, that has to be set in context. There's nothing that unusual about where we are in terms of the amount of time.
[00:02:04] But there is this pressure, obviously, of needing to meet the Friday of 25th of April to get into the next stage, Report Stage. put the bill back into the Chamber. They're mindful of that.
[00:02:16] Mark D'Arcy: And that might, for example, entail them sitting rather later than usual in the committee. Some very long sittings, 8pm or 9pm finishes to their afternoon sittings, for example.
[00:02:26] Which can get pretty gruelling for members of the committee who can be there, you know, 4, 5, 6 hours.
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.
