Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

Jonathan Davies Excerpts

2nd reading
Friday 11th September 2026 Commons Chamber

[Andrew George (St Ives) (LD)]

It is an honour to be called to speak in this debate. Indeed, it is the first time that I have. I am a sponsor of the Bill and a member of the Health and Social Care Committee. I congratulate the hon. Member for Rochester and Strood (Lauren Edwards) on how she introduced this debate, and the hon. Member for Spen Valley (Kim Leadbeater) on her outstanding work and championing of this issue over all this time.

If this Bill is defeated today, it will leave us with a significantly unsatisfactory and dangerous status quo. All the legitimate concerns about safeguards and coercion raised by those who oppose the Bill will simply continue, but problems will probably be increasingly driven behind closed doors, as things will, I fear, only get worse. Defeating the Bill would also reward the worst of the reprehensible behaviour of those in the other place who blocked this legislation last time. If the purpose of the shocking behaviour of a small minority of peers towards this Bill earlier this year was simply to make a powerful case for their own abolition, they certainly hit the jackpot. If we reward them with victory today, we weaken the relationship between the two Houses and cede more power and influence over our democracy than is healthy or wise.

A theme that has run through the debate is the implication that the Bill is insufficiently perfect. Indeed, “perfect is the enemy of the good” syndrome runs through this and a lot of our other debates and legislation. As I think my hon. Friend the Member for Esher and Walton (Monica Harding) described it, the concept of a 100% perfect Bill is simply in the minds of those who believe it possible to get to that point. When have we ever had a perfect piece of legislation?

[Jonathan Davies (Mid Derbyshire) (Lab)]

Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

[Andrew George]

I am sorry, but because of time, I will not. If the hon. Member wants, he can send me a postcard with the answer to my question: when have we ever had a perfect piece of legislation? We would be perpetually restrained from making progress if perfect legislation was the aim, because we only produce compromises, not the utopian perfection that we all want. If we were all sent off at the beginning of this process two years ago to look at how best to handle end-of-life considerations, and given a pen and paper and put in a room without a mobile phone to draft a piece of legislation, we would have 650 “perfect” Bills, written according to the opinions of each of us in this Chamber.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dr Simon Opher (Stroud) (Lab)]

May I praise the House for some fantastic speeches all round, including from my hon. Friends the Members for West Lancashire (Ashley Dalton) and for Filton and Bradley Stoke (Claire Hazelgrove), and indeed just now from my hon. Friend the Member for Penistone and Stocksbridge (Dr Tidball) and the hon. Member for Runnymede and Weybridge (Dr Spencer)? I am proud of our House and the way in which we have debated this matter.

I have been involved in delivering palliative care and end-of-life care—they are actually quite different—for over 34 years and I continue to do so as a GP. Given the time, I will cut my speech short, but I want to say that this is really about choice. Choice exists for people in France, in Spain, in the Netherlands, in Belgium, in Australia, in the US and in Canada, and indeed in Jersey and the Isle of Man. It also exists for people in this country if they have got 15 grand. However, we do not give access to it at the moment.

To all the doubters, I say that this is the safest assisted dying Bill in the world—full stop. That is a fact, because it has got so many safeguards: many more than the ones in Australia or any other place.

[Jonathan Davies]

Will my hon. Friend give way?

[Dr Opher]

No, I will carry on if that is okay.

It is a great thing to offer end-of-life care and palliative care. In 2010, the UK system for palliative care was at the level of the best in the world, yet still people went to Dignitas. Still, 600 people who were suffering from terminal diagnosis killed themselves. Indeed, in Oregon, 92% of patients who opted for assisted dying were receiving good palliative care. They are different things.