Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

Lord Rooker Excerpts

Friday 30th January 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Coffey (Con)]

My Lords, I put in my opposition generally. Just as we said on the first day of debate, it is not certainly my intention to move a Division on this. We will leave these things to Report.

We have debated Clause 1 extensively but, as I said in my explanatory statement, I wanted the opportunity to potentially revisit certain issues, or to try to get some more answers on them if we felt they had not been covered. I know that on day one noble Lords thought I was filibustering by talking about Wales, but, for me, devolution is a really important part of the Bill, and I have to say that I was not satisfied by the Minister’s answers at the time.

Increasingly, pretty much every freedom of information request has been rejected, and I do not think that helps Parliament. The Cabinet Office tells us that the Government are forming policy on this issue in anticipation, but that it is not in the public interest to share that. I find that really challenging. It is no surprise that we have spent so much time on Clause 1; it is the key clause and let us not pretend otherwise. However, even the briefing pack for an official who gave oral evidence to your Lordships’ Select Committee— I did not put that FoI request in, but someone did—was turned down for release. That decision was made personally by the Justice Minister, again on the grounds that it was not in the public interest and “We’re only going to work with the sponsor”. I genuinely think we would make more progress if we had better understanding and more shared information as we consider one of the most significant changes to the law that we have had. However, I will not be pressing this to a Division.

[Lord Rooker (Lab)]

My Lords, I agree with Clause 1. If there was a vote on it, I would vote for it. I may not carry the Committee with me but, having sat through Committee and one day of Second Reading— I could not attend the first day—I feel we have reached the point where, if the Bill were a tree, we have dealt with the trunk. We have now got to a point where we look at the branches.

The Commons—this is a message to the Commons, in a way—needs to know that we can move at pace once we have the Bill sponsor’s reaction and proposals following the debate on Clause 1. I am absolutely convinced that control of the progress and speed of the Bill is now completely in the hands of my noble and learned friend, not in those of the Committee.