Read Bill Ministerial Extracts
Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateSimon Hoare
Main Page: Simon Hoare (Conservative - North Dorset)Department Debates - View all Simon Hoare's debates with the Ministry of Justice
(3Â weeks, 3Â days ago)
Commons Chamber
Lauren Edwards
I am going to make a little bit of progress. The four-year implementation period means that nobody would be receiving assisted dying until 2031 at the earliest. That would be too late for many people, but it would be plenty of time to make improvements to palliative care, which would go hand in hand with providing the choice of an assisted death for those who still need it. We can, and should, do both.
The hon. Lady is making a principled argument that the House must listen to and respect, but she has spoken about choice and dignity, and the one thing I have never understood about this Bill is the importance of the specific time period—that it would apply to adults who have six months or fewer to live. If there is to be choice and dignity, and if people are in pain and the condition is terminal, what is the sanctity of six months? If the principles of choice and dignity underpin the Bill, surely six months is way too narrow.
Lauren Edwards
I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention. Obviously, Members have previously raised concerns about doctors getting their prognosis wrong when it comes to how long someone is able to live. My understanding is that, given the international evidence, six months was seen a reasonable line to draw, because as the time of death gets closer, the accuracy of the diagnosis is increased.
Lauren Edwards
I will make some progress.
Members took the best part of a year to grapple with this issue: spoke to constituents; engaged with the organisations that would be affected; read the materials; thought deeply; consulted their conscience. They arrived at a decision—whatever that decision was and however they voted or, indeed, did not vote at all—but it was a difficult process. It is not acceptable that the outcome of those deliberations has not been respected. We owe it to the people we represent to find a resolution on this issue one way or another within this Parliament.
I am grateful to the hon. Lady for giving way a second time. This is the democratically accountable House; I think we would all agree on that point. On that basis, is she prepared to accept in Committee and on Report, if this Bill secures its Second Reading this afternoon, amendments authored, debated and voted upon by Members of Parliament?
Lauren Edwards
We have been through that process. There was a Committee that had hundreds of hours of scrutiny and properly kicked the tyres on the robustness of this legislation. What we need to do as a House is send the Bill back to the House of Lords so that they can finish their job. We did ours.
Not for the first time this week, I find myself wholeheartedly agreeing with the right hon. Member for East Hampshire (Damian Hinds). He and I agree that we will all act according to our conscience and respect others if they come to a different conclusion.
I thank Members on both sides of the debate across the House for their consideration of this legislation and their thoughtful contributions to the debate. By my count, 40 Members have spoken in the debate; I have listened to all that they have said with great interest, and I thank each and every one of them. It has been a difficult debate to speak in at times. We have heard of people’s own family and private experiences, and that is hard to bring to this House. I really thank all colleagues across every corner of this House for doing so.
The issue of assisted dying has been subject to extensive and detailed consideration over a number of years, most recently in this House and the other place in the previous Session, as well as outside Parliament. We think today of all those who feel strongly on both sides of this debate and what they are thinking about as they listen to our discussions. We send our care to all those who are struggling with grief.
Let me reiterate that the Government are neutral on the question of assisted dying and on the passage of the Bill. As the Prime Minister has said, this is an incredibly important and personal debate, and it is right that it is a matter for Parliament, not Government, to decide whether the Bill should become law. However, the Government have a duty to the statute book. It is on that basis that I am speaking at the Dispatch Box today as the Minister responsible for helping to ensure that the Bill, if passed, is workable and effective.
I must explain to Members that in the interests of time, I am going to keep my remarks purposefully brief, and I will not be taking any interventions; I apologise to Members wholeheartedly for that, as I would normally take interventions. I am happy to discuss with Members any issues that they have.
I have listened to the entire debate today and heard Members’ views, questions and many interventions, and I want to turn briefly to a couple of important issues. On procedure, like any private Member’s Bill, this Bill will proceed through the usual parliamentary stages, subject to Parliament’s will. With respect to questions to the Government on the Parliament Acts, I refer Members to the Acts themselves, which set out conditions under which legislation may pass without requiring the consent of the House of Lords. That is a matter for Parliament, and it is not for the Government to decide whether to pass this Bill. As is usual with any constitutional questions, Members may approach the Clerks for further advice, as I am sure you would agree, Madam Deputy Speaker.
I have said that I am not going to take any interventions. I am sorry to be discourteous to the hon. Member, but I am going to stick to that.
I want to make a few comments on the matter of social care and palliative care, having recently taken over responsibility for these most important issues. In my opinion, social care has been ignored for far too long—both the 1.5 million people, mainly women, who work in it and the families who need it. We have heard that across the House today. The Prime Minister has made social care a personal priority, and I am working with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State to deliver changes now, alongside the work being done by the Casey commission, which we have expedited by a year.
Building a national care service will mean that people know where to turn when they need help and that care workers are given the status and the respect they deserve. We are pushing ahead with workforce changes, including career progression, training and job security, and we have made £4.6 billion of additional funding available for adult social care by the end of this Parliament, including £500 million for the first fair pay agreement for care workers. We will strengthen social care now—we are not just waiting for the Casey commission—and provide greater choice and independence as we do so.
Turning to palliative care—