It is impossible to predict what will happen on Friday when MPs vote on Kim Leadbeater’s private members bill to legalise assisted dying. The more time one spends in Westminster taking soundings and questioning MPs, the more uncertain it all feels.
LabourList has been crunching the numbers and so far has 77 Labour MPs who have said they will vote for the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, 47 who have said they will vote against, and 86 who are undecided. If the undecideds were to split evenly, the bill would pass – but on such a significant issue, no one can predict what they will eventually choose.
Fierce rows have broken out in the cabinet despite the request for ministers not to campaign either way. Keir Starmer has so far stayed silent, but is expected to support the legislation. Other parties are similarly split. Assisted dying has long been supported by Liberal Democrats, but their own leader Ed Davey is opposed. There are strong Conservative voices on both sides. Yesterday, former Conservative justice secretary David Gauke wrote for the New Statesman urging undecided MPs to back the bill, arguing that “maintaining the status quo is not a neutral choice”. And two of the most unlikely MPs to find common cause – Labour’s Diane Abbott and Edward Leigh from the Tories, the Mother and Father of the House – published a joint op-ed last week arguing against the bill.
It is rare for the Commons to face such a knife-edge moment, especially when the government has such a strong majority. It is even more unusual for an issue to come up that defies party lines to this extent
But in a way, the turmoil in parliament mirrors the way the public feel about this issue. This week the research agency More In Common published a report called “Proceeding with Caution: Britons’ Views on Assisted Dying”. For those used to trawling through opinion research, it makes remarkable reading. In a country that feels increasingly divided – economically, ideologically, demographically and geographically – changing the law to permit assisted dying has not just majority backing (65 per cent support it, compared to just 13 per cent who oppose it) but broad majority backing. Support spans age, gender, education level and – crucially – political leanings.
More in Common often breaks down survey participants into seven categories that align with different voter groups. The report finds that, while there is majority support across all these groups, the strongest support can be found among so-called “Progressive Activists” (highly educated, urban, likely Guardian readers) and “Loyal Nationalists” (patriotic, frustrated with elites in London, likely Daily Mail readers). In other words, metropolitan liberals who vote Green and Lib Dem and Red Wall types who might be sympathetic to Reform are united on the need to change the law and offer people enduring intense suffering the right to end their lives on their own terms.
It isn’t quite that simple, of course. The report’s other key finding is that support is very much conditional on there being strong safeguards in place. There are real concerns about whether the NHS is currently in a fit state to provide it (74 per cent of people generally think it is not – although it’s worth noting that researchers find widespread doubt that the NHS is in a fit state to do anything at the moment). There are ways in which Leadbeater’s bill does not match up with what the public want: for example, people are more concerned with giving the right to assisted dying to those who are in extreme pain rather than those deemed to be in the last six months of their life. And there is also consensus that MPs should listen more to the terminally ill and families of people who have been through the process when making their decision, as well as doctors and nurses. As Hannah Barnes outlined last week, one of the concerns around this bill is the fact that palliative care doctors have spoken out against it.
The public also think there should be more consultation on this matter before it passes through Parliament. But overall they do not want it progress more slowly – only 19 per cent think the current timeline is too quick. The preferred outcome seems to be for MPs to pass the bill at second reading on Friday, then hold further consultation and work in committee stage to improve it.
It is not the job of MPs to simply adhere to public opinion. They are elected to Parliament to consider factors their constituents may not be aware of – regarding risks, legal complexities and the practical challenges in implementing the kind of safeguards the public consider crucial.
Still, the report might help clarify matters for undecided MPs wrestling with their consciences. That the public is in favour of some kind of change in the law is not in doubt. Most interestingly of all, perhaps, is the fact that this support is neither sudden nor recent: it is as high now as it was in 1983, when the British Social Attitudes Study starting tracking public sentiment on this issue.
The last time assisted dying came before the Commons, via another private members bill in 2015, it was overwhelmingly rejected. The public have not changed their minds since then. Have MPs? We’ll find out on Friday.
This piece first appeared in the Morning Call newsletter; receive it every morning by subscribing on Substack here
Content from our partners
Related
