The House of Lords opened a two-day debate on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill on Friday, as peers clashed over the level of scrutiny and safeguards in proposed legislation to legalise assisted dying in England and Wales.
Supporters in the Lords urged peers to respect the decision by MPs in June to back the bill, while opponents said the measure contained "massive problems" and remained "underdeveloped". The bill would allow terminally ill adults with fewer than six months to live to apply for an assisted death, subject to approval by two doctors and a panel including a social worker, a senior legal figure and a psychiatrist.
A committee of the Lords has warned that the degree of scrutiny the bill received in the Commons was "significantly less than we would expect to see for an equivalent government bill," and another committee this week cautioned that the bill "gives sweeping, unspecified and unjustified powers to the government." Baroness Luciana Berger, a former Labour MP who is among leading opponents, has tabled an amendment calling for a committee to take further evidence from professionals and ministers before the Lords debate proceeds. Allies said such a committee would be required to report by the end of the year.
Lord Falconer, the former Labour justice secretary who will champion the legislation in the Lords, said the Commons had already decided assisted dying should be an option for the terminally ill and that it would be inappropriate for the appointed House of Lords to frustrate the will of elected representatives. "We can look at ways that we can improve the legislation which comes from them but we respect the decisions of the Commons," he told BBC News.
Almost 200 peers are expected to speak during the two days, including the former prime minister Baroness May, dozens of former ministers and five bishops. Unusually, the bill has been allotted two days for its initial debate, known as second reading, after an unusually high number of peers sought to contribute. Significant votes are not expected during the initial sittings and are likely to take place later in the autumn when the bill returns to the Lords for detailed consideration and amendment.
Key areas likely to be addressed by peers include protections against coercion, the thresholds and procedures used to assess mental capacity, the adequacy of medical and legal safeguards, and how operational details would be implemented when many specifics are currently left to be determined by ministers. Both supporters and opponents said the outcome will depend in part on crossbench peers who are not aligned to political parties.
If the Lords approve amendments that the bill's sponsor in the Commons, Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, does not accept, she may seek to overturn those changes when the bill returns to the Commons. That exchange, known as "ping-pong," could take several weeks as both Houses seek agreement on contested provisions.
Backers of the bill said they are confident it will survive the Lords' scrutiny. They cited a decision by the government to keep the parliamentary session open until the spring, which supporters say should provide enough time to clear all legislative stages. If the bill fails to complete all stages by the end of the parliamentary session, a new bill would be required unless the prime minister or government adopts the measure as a government bill.
Opponents, including Baroness Berger, argued that key operational questions remain unanswered. "It is really unfortunate that the House of Lords is having to interrogate such an underdeveloped piece of legislation that hasn't yet been properly scrutinised," she said, adding that the bill was "silent on a whole raft of issues" about how assisted dying would work in practice.
Peers have also noted wider ethical and medical concerns raised by professional bodies and advocacy groups, and the Lords committees urged more thorough parliamentary deliberation given the gravity of the subject. Supporters counter that the Commons debated the bill extensively and that elected members have authorised assisted dying as an option for those who are terminally ill.
Parliamentarians expect detailed amendment debates in the autumn and a protracted legislative process if the Lords propose significant changes. The way peers balance respect for the Commons with their own deliberative role will determine how quickly, and in what form, the bill progresses through the remaining stages of Parliament.