Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

Debate between Lord Mawson and Baroness Coffey

Committee stage
Friday 23rd January 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Mawson (CB)]

I was just going to do that. I address the amendment because I worry that, while the amendment and the idea of a navigator seem very straightforward intellectually, I am trying to suggest that in the real practical world out there, when you engage with it, as my colleagues and I have done over the last 40 years, you see something quite different.

[Baroness Coffey (Con)]

My Lords, I shall speak to Amendments 287A, 287B and 771ZB. I call the noble Lord, Lord Birt, my noble friend. We went to the same school, although admittedly not at the same time. I am conscious that he has come at this with an approach of a lot of research, as he set out. The noble Lord knows that I disagree with him, but I understand why he is trying to speed up. However, I wonder whether he has taken account of evidence presented already. The noble Baroness, Lady Fox of Buckley, talked about the CEO of Mind, but also Marie Curie spoke about this and indeed the Royal College of Psychiatrists.

I am particularly thinking of the speeding up and that moment of reflection, which is really important. I think the noble Lord is already suggesting in his Amendment 771 that patients should be aware of their right to withdraw from the assistance process at any stage. There is quite a lot in here that sets out a framework that could be done through the NHS. I completely agree with what the noble Lords, Lord Stevens of Birmingham and Lord Mawson, have said: it worries me that, if this ends up in the NHS, it will accelerate in becoming a routine end of life. In my meetings with the Royal College of GPs, it has been clear that it does not want this to be part of the NHS and it would absolutely resist it being part of the NHS contract.