Assisted Dying Bill Faces collapse in lords Amidst Democratic Legitimacy Concerns
Table of Contents
The UK’s assisted dying legislation is on the brink of failure as peers are accused of deliberately delaying it’s progress through parliament, raising serious questions about the democratic legitimacy of the House of Lords. Supporters of the bill now concede it is in grave danger of running out of time before the end of the parliamentary session, with the slow consideration of over 1,150 amendments threatening to prevent a final vote.
MPs Urge Lords to End Deliberate Delay
A growing chorus of MPs is calling on the House of lords to cease what they perceive as obstructionist tactics. In a letter to The Guardian, former ministers Justin Madders adn Dame Nia Griffith, alongside select committee chair Debbie Abrahams – all of whom initially opposed the bill’s core principles – urged peers not to “deliberately filibuster” the legislation.
The urgency stems from the glacial pace of debate. Just 80 of the more than 1,150 tabled amendments had been addressed after three days of deliberation. this slow progress has fueled accusations that opponents are intentionally running down the clock.
Constitutional Crisis Looms
The frustration extends beyond the assisted dying bill itself. MPs are also angered by the repeated blocking of a separate bill aimed at strengthening renters’ rights. “They should never conflate scrutiny with obstruction,” they wrote, emphasizing their commitment to thorough examination of the bill’s details.
Calls for Reform Intensify
The escalating tension has prompted intervention from senior cross-benchers, including former independent terrorism reviewer lord Carlile, who is attempting to mediate between the two sides and expedite the amendment process.
Simultaneously occurring, Unlock Democracy, a constitutional pressure group, has launched a campaign accusing peers of “filibustering” and “sabotaging” the bill’s progress. The group has appealed to Labor peer Lord Falconer, who is leading the bill in the Lords, to prioritize its advancement.
No Constitutional Mandate to Block?
Despite the pressure,some peers argue there is no constitutional basis for them to be compelled to pass the bill,particularly as it was not included in any party’s manifesto. A professor of public law at the university of Cambridge, Mark Elliott, confirmed that the Lords are legally within their rights to reject the legislation.”There is no general principle requiring the Lords to yield to the Commons,” he stated. “But the current constitutional position is clear: it is open to the Lords to reject this private members’ bill.”
High Stakes and a Race Against Time
Peers will continue debating amendments to the bill on Friday, with six additional days scheduled in the new year.One key amendment, proposed by lord Carlile, seeks to restore the role of a High Court judge in deciding applications for assisted death, a provision removed from the bill during its passage through the Commons.
The fate of the bill also hangs on the health of Dame Esther Rantzen, a prominent assisted dying campaigner with stage-four lung cancer, who was planning to address peers this week but is currently too unwell. In a message to peers, she expressed concern that the Lords were “sabotaging the bill rather than proposing genuine amendments.”
A cross-party group of MPs has also released a letter warning peers that the bill risks failing “not on its merits but consequently of political manoeuvring.” The letter, signed by prominent figures including Tory former cabinet ministers Kit Malthouse and Andrew Mitchell, underscores the growing political pressure on the Lords.
Lord Carlile, despite being a longstanding opponent of assisted suicide legislation, believes the Lords have a obligation to allow a vote on the bill.”I think that it is indeed required of the Lords to self-discipline so that we get through the legal processes so there can be a vote on the principle at third reading,” he said,adding that even if defeated,the process itself would ensure the legislation is “one of the safest,if not the safest,in the world.” The coming weeks will determine whether the assisted dying bill can overcome the obstacles in the House of Lords or succumb to a fate of parliamentary delay.
