Today, MPs must decide whether they support the Assisted Dying/Assisted Suicide Bill.
It has come about not because of a manifesto pledge, or public pressure, or extensive consultation, but through the work of a single well-funded campaign group and the Private Members’ Bill (PMB) ballot.
MPs are voting on whether this specific Bill should become law by this process.
And if they vote in favour, they will be taking the Bill – drafted by campaigners – and making it theirs; shouldering responsibility for it and all its consequences if it becomes law.
It is a profoundly heavy responsibility in the absence of any preparatory work or an impact assessment.
They will take this decision after just five hours debate: maybe one in six MPs will have a chance to speak.
The first decision facing MPs is whether that is enough time. Those that have already made up their minds will call for ‘closure’ – to end debate and go straight to a vote. It is possible they will be opposed. Those opposing will know they are unlikely to win, but for some it will be a way of signalling their discontent with the process.
The second decision facing MPs will be on a ‘reasoned amendment’ if the Speaker selects it for debate. It allows MPs to put on record their reasons for voting against the Bill – rather than leaving it in the hands of their opponents to ‘spin’ their decision.
In this case, a cross-party group of MPs argue this is a poor way to legislate on a matter of this importance. Succinctly, they make clear the need for sufficient debate and scrutiny of the Bill, an independent review and public consultation – as happened for the Abortion Act 1967 – and a decision informed by an independent assessment of palliative care.
Their amendment mirrors public opinion. More in Common found that 60% want more public consultation before a decision is taken.
If a majority vote in favour of the reasoned amendment, the Bill will not proceed, but MPs will have made clear what they need if they are to do their job as legislators. The path would be open for the Government to undertake that work, and as we are still at the start of this Parliament, there is ample time to do so and still legislate.
If the amendment is defeated, MPs will vote on whether to give the Bill a second reading and whether they approve the Bill. If they vote ‘no’ this Bill falls.
If a majority are in favour, the Bill and MPs’ views on the Bill, will dominate for some time.
First, the Bill will proceed to Committee – most likely a Public Bill Committee. Responding to widespread disquiet, MPs will vote to ensure the Committee can take oral or written evidence.
Then the Bill sponsor, Kim Leadbeater MP, will choose every MP who will sit on the Committee. She will be confident of a majority for every vote on every amendment. This is a feature of the PMB process – if the sponsor doesn’t want their Bill amended in a particular way, it is highly unlikely to happen, even if it is the Government asking. It’s one of the reasons PMB committee stage is so perfunctory.
How long or when the Committee sits will be up to the Committee, but it could get going within two weeks. Only Committee members can debate and vote on amendments.
The rest of the House will have to wait until Report stage on 25 April to consider the Bill in detail, but there will be huge pressure to curtail debate and not propose amendments; to keep it to the five hours allocated, because if the Bill does not complete its passage before the prescribed time for PMBs has run out it falls.
It will be a hugely divisive stage – critical to protecting the vulnerable and ensuring what reaches the statute books is as good as it can be – but each side will accuse the other of bad faith. We can see that already in how the reasoned amendment was spun as a ‘wrecking amendment’. Many important but less significant amendments are likely to be neglected.
When that stage is complete, there will be a third reading. It follows immediately after report stage and it’s difficult to know how long MPs will have to debate. It could be minimal, particularly if a majority seek an immediate vote.
This has been billed by the Bill’s supporters as the ‘big vote’. It will be the last chance to turn back, but if the Bill has got that far it will be much harder for MPs to vote no.
That’s what campaigners are counting on.
And they know that once MPs sign off the Bill, the Lords – bound by convention and that insistent clock – will have to wave it through with minimal amendments and minimal debate.
To vote in favour of the Bill today is to knock over the first domino.
If MPs are uncertain, vote against.
Click here to subscribe to our daily briefing – the best pieces from CapX and across the web.
CapX depends on the generosity of its readers. If you value what we do, please consider making a donation.
