Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

Lord Birt Excerpts

2nd reading
Friday 12th September 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Birt (CB)]

My Lords, I strongly support this Bill. Overall, it is well considered. Importantly, it benefits from the experiences of many other countries that started this journey well before us. In no sense would we be pioneers.

The carefully designed process that the Bill sets out should address the possible risks—for instance, severe coercion—that have, reasonably, been identified. We know from surveys that there is overwhelming public support for assisted dying. All of us have received heart-rending letters pleading for the passage of this Bill from individuals who have had the harrowing experience of witnessing loved ones slowly dying in extreme pain or in utterly debilitating circumstances. This Bill confers the right for such an individual facing imminent death not just to avoid intense anguish and pain—as well as the prospect of their condition progressing intolerably—but to die at a moment of their choosing, in the circumstances of their choosing, and with dignity. I want that right, and anyone who wants it should have it, too.

No doubt the Bill can be improved further. The Delegated Powers Committee makes many persuasive points which we should take on board. However, the Explanatory Notes remind us of decades of attempts to introduce assisted dying legislation that have simply failed. It is highly unlikely that any Government in the foreseeable future will seize the baton. We must therefore make this Bill work, then pass it.

I have only one personal reservation, which I share with others, including the noble Lord, Lord Forsyth. Although I entirely see the value of a process setting out two independent medical assessments, two periods of reflection and an independent review panel, in a world of constrained resources where it is hard these days even to see your GP, there may be the risk of unwelcome slippage and a prolonged delay—perhaps in August or over the Christmas period—that intensifies suffering. Should we build into this process, on the one hand, greater certainty on the total time normally taken; or, on the other, some flexibility on telescoping time when circumstances demand it, particularly for those who may enter the process at a later stage?

Finally, I strongly advise anyone who is uncertain and harbouring doubts about the Bill to watch the one-hour discussion, hosted by the Healthcare Professionals for Assisted Dying, with four Australian practitioners working in this field. Without exception, they come across as people of enormous integrity and humanity, caring, truly dedicated to their work, and entirely convincing about the necessity and effectiveness of a carefully considered assisted dying process. It is well worth watching. I have no doubt whatever that our medical professionals who volunteer—and you have to volunteer—for a role in the assisted dying process will equally rise to the challenge.

Let us further improve, but then pass, this critically important Bill.

Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

Lord Birt Excerpts

Committee stage
Friday 5th December 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Birt (CB)]

I just want to ask: does the noble Lord think that we should try to reach the 10th group of amendments in the course of today?

[Lord Harper (Con)]

I am trying to make a brief remark. I have been speaking for only one minute and 45 seconds; if I keep getting interrupted, I will not be able to sit down. I was going to make literally one more point, having listened to the debate. After all, this is supposed to be a debate where we listen to what noble Lords say and respond—

[Lord Birt (CB)]

Could the noble Lord please answer my question: should we try to reach the 10th group of amendments today?

[Lord Harper (Con)]

I want to try to make progress, which is why I was trying to keep my remarks very brief; if the noble Lord keeps interrupting me, they will necessarily take longer. All I was going to do was make one further point.

I was very struck by what the noble Baroness, Lady Berridge, said about the differences in the medical prognosis for a number of conditions among younger people. I suggest to the noble and learned Lord, Lord Falconer, that as well as looking at the assessment process, he should look at the extent to which clinical advice and evidence can be brought in to see whether a terminal diagnosis for a younger person is qualitatively different; from listening to the noble Baroness, Lady Berridge, that appears to be the case. That may be the appropriate way to pick up the concerns, which are widely shared. But I also accept—the noble Baroness, Lady Fox, made this point—that the law has to have some clarity to it. Like the noble Baroness, I think that having lots of different ages would be very difficult.

From listening to the points made by the noble Baroness, Lady Berridge, I think that may be a way forward; I commend it to the noble and learned Lord when he undertakes his thought process for what he may bring forward on Report.