Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

Baroness Whitaker Excerpts

Friday 27th February 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Finlay of Llandaff (CB)]

The point that I was trying to make, and I am sorry if I have not expressed it properly, is that there is a huge amount of discretion here and the commissioner will be the person who appoints the panels. In a way, by assessing the work of the panels, the commissioner will be marking his or her own homework. That does not provide the independence that one would require.

If I may go on, we heard too in our Select Committee hearing, which the noble Lord was present at, about problems that have occurred in New Zealand. These need to be taken as a warning: we must ensure that there is independent transparency and lack of bias in the commission, through statutory safeguards, to avoid the failures that occurred in other countries. In the case of Mortier v Belgium, the European court—

[Baroness Whitaker (Lab)]

I apologise for interrupting, but I am a little confused. It seems that there is a considerable principled difference between expertise and conflict of interest. People who have been involved in assisted dying have expertise; they do not necessarily have a conflict of interest. You can be a professional, as I am sure the noble Baroness well understands, and be independent, so why is expertise ruled out?

[Baroness Finlay of Llandaff (CB)]

I am grateful to the noble Baroness for that intervention, because expertise is not ruled out. It is the way that the commission functions that is important—that that does not allow skewing and silencing. What I was going on to point out is that one of the commissioners on the Belgian commission resigned because they felt that they were being silenced whenever they raised issues about problems in reporting, that they were unable to continue to provide ethically high standards and that their own expertise was not being respected.

I would be grateful if I could just continue for a moment, because I am not trying to filibuster. I would like to make that absolutely clear, following the extremely unpleasant, vicious comments that have been made about me, both in the media and in very aggressive emails that have been sent to me. If I may continue, I would be most grateful.

I am simply asking whether a commissioner with a financial interest in an assisted death business, whatever that is and however it is commissioned, is actually truly independent. There seems to be no requirement for the appointment to be scrutinised by a committee of Parliament or for a register of interest to be published. I am sure that that would happen, because that is a normal course of action in this country, but the equality impact assessment seems silent on this. The noble and learned Lord, Lord Garnier, referred to the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 in relation to appointments, so I will not repeat that, but this commissioner’s post appears, as written, to be in the gift of the Prime Minister, and there does not appear to be verified impartiality in terms of the exercise of the functions, given the great importance of this role and the problem that if it does not work well then public confidence in the system will be lost.