BURSTMPs passed it without sufficient safeguarding. If there is any point to the upper chamber, it is to give the legislation the open debate we need
Sign up for our new weekly newsletter Matters of Opinion, where our columnists and writers will reflect on what they’ve been debating, thinking about, reading and more
The House of Lords has a rare opportunity to prove its worth to the country today, as it begins to debate the assisted dying bill. Personally, I would be in favour of peers throwing out the whole idea, which is what this dangerous and badly written bill surely deserves. But it is unlikely that they will want to go so directly against the Commons, especially on such a controversial issue. So instead I must hope that they listen to disabled people’s groups, as well as legal and medical experts, and at least undo some of the lower house’s most egregious errors.
Whether you are for or against the principle of assisted dying (I am pro), we should be able to agree that the passage of this particular bill through the Commons has been haphazard, deeply unedifying and fundamentally flawed. The Lords should reject this precedent and, by adopting a better process, produce a much safer bill than the one they have been sent.
Lucy Webster is a political journalist and the author of The View from Down Here: Life As a Young Disabled Woman
Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
Continue reading...