Assisted dying bill almost certain to fail - Sky News understands

Assisted Dying Bill – Impending Failure and Political Implications

Key Concepts:

• Assisted Dying Bill: Legislation aiming to allow individuals with terminal illnesses to legally request assistance in ending their lives.
• Private Members Bill: A bill introduced by a backbench MP rather than a government minister, often with limited parliamentary time.
• King’s Speech: A speech delivered by the monarch at the State Opening of Parliament, outlining the government’s legislative agenda. Marks the end of a parliamentary session.
• Parliament Act: A UK parliamentary procedure allowing the House of Commons to override the House of Lords in certain circumstances.
• Guillotine: A parliamentary procedure used to limit debate on a bill, effectively forcing a vote.
• Statute Books: The official collection of Acts of Parliament.
• Chief Whip: A party official responsible for maintaining discipline and ensuring MPs vote according to the party line.

1. Current Status and Impending Failure

The assisted dying bill, having passed through the House of Commons with overwhelming support, is now facing almost certain failure in the House of Lords before the end of the current parliamentary session in May, coinciding with the King’s Speech. This represents an “unprecedented dead end” for the “landmark piece of legislation.” The government chief whip in the Lords has indicated that no additional time will be allocated for debate, limiting discussion to only six remaining Fridays. This lack of time effectively prevents the bill from becoming law. Inside government, acknowledgement of this impending failure is growing.

2. Potential Revival Strategies & Challenges

Proponents of assisted dying believe the bill could be revived in the next parliamentary session via another private members bill. This would potentially avoid repeating the lengthy Commons process and could ultimately utilize the Parliament Act to force passage through a reluctant House of Lords. However, this requires “enormous political will” and, crucially, some level of government acquiescence. The use of the Parliament Act is rare, having been employed only once in the last 30 years.

Despite a “decent margin” of support in the Commons during second and third readings, the political obstacles to enacting the bill are now considered significantly higher. The debate centers on whether the “political forces against this ever becoming law” have become insurmountable.

3. Prime Minister Sunak’s Position and Government Strategy

The Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak, previously appeared supportive of assisted dying in opposition, even aligning with campaigner Esther Ransen and voting in favour of related measures. However, upon entering government, he opted for a “hands-off” approach, utilizing a private members bill as the legislative vehicle. This strategy is likened to similar approaches taken during debates on the death penalty in the 1960s.

This hands-off approach, potentially influenced by opposition within his own cabinet from figures like Wes Streeting (Health Secretary) and Shabbana Mahmmod (Home Secretary), meant less direct control over the bill’s progress. The result is a significant social reform that is now “a lot less likely to happen.” The government’s decision not to include the issue in its manifesto was an attempt to avoid internal divisions within the Labour party, but the timeline meant the issue would inevitably become a factor in the next general election.

4. Parliamentary-Public Relationship & Perceptions

A key point raised is the disconnect between public perception and the reality of the bill’s status. Many believe that, having passed the Commons, assisted dying will become a legal right. This is demonstrably untrue, and the failure of the bill could lead to public disillusionment with politics. Concerns have been raised about the perceived lack of safeguards within the process, as highlighted by critics.

The potential “collapse of a promise” by parliamentarians, particularly in the face of procedural objections from a minority of peers, is expected to “rankle the public.” The broader sentiment of “politics failing to deliver change” is likely to be exacerbated by this outcome, further damaging the relationship between parliament and the electorate. The fact that a significant vote in the Commons did not translate into actual change is seen as particularly damaging.

5. Procedural Context & Historical Parallels

The use of a private members bill allowed the government to maintain a degree of distance from the controversial issue. However, this also meant reduced control over its fate. The situation is contrasted with historical debates, such as those surrounding the death penalty in the 1960s, highlighting the challenges of navigating contentious social reforms in a “much more contested, much more toxic political era.”

6. Notable Quotes

• “This is taking us to an unprecedented sort of dead end at the moment for this landmark piece of legislation.” – Commentator, describing the bill’s likely failure.
• “You get the sense that you had a big social reform that Karma was in favor of, but because he tried to do it in a hands-off way…it's handsoff and therefore out of his control, less in his control.” – Commentator, on Sunak’s approach.
• “Politics failing to deliver change is a is is quite a big um sentiment amongst the public.” – Commentator, on the potential public reaction.

Conclusion:

The assisted dying bill is poised to fail due to a lack of parliamentary time, highlighting the complexities of navigating contentious social reforms within the UK political system. The Prime Minister’s “hands-off” approach, intended to avoid internal conflict, ultimately ceded control of the legislative process. This outcome is likely to fuel public disillusionment and further strain the relationship between parliament and the electorate, particularly given the widespread belief that the bill’s passage through the Commons guaranteed its enactment. The future of assisted dying legislation remains uncertain, dependent on a shift in political will and potentially the controversial use of the Parliament Act.