The House of Lords has approved extending the discussion on the Assisted Dying legislation following accusations of attempting to derail it through excessive amendments.
Concern has risen among supporters that the bill may not clear all parliamentary stages within the designated timeframe. A motion proposed in the Lords sought agreement for additional time to deliberate on the bill, which was unanimously passed after an hour-long debate.
A small group of eight unelected Peers has introduced the majority of the 1,100 amendments causing delays in the process. Dignity in Dying has alleged discussions of a “sweepstake” among opponents to gauge the minimal progress achievable. Furthermore, reports claim an email circulating for suggestions on more amendments.
Criticism was directed at the Lords for the perceived time-wasting, tarnishing their public image. Despite receiving two positive votes in the Commons, the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill has encountered obstacles in the Lords since June 2025, raising concerns about time running out.
Campaigners have condemned the House of Lords for stalling the bill’s progress, labeling it as filibustering and undemocratic. Louise Shackleton, whose husband passed away at Dignitas in December 2024, expressed strong disapproval of the delays.
Lord Falconer, a Labour Peer overseeing the bill in the House of Lords, cautioned that failure to complete the stages by the end of the current parliamentary session in May would lead to its lapse. He emphasized the significant public interest and the extensive scrutiny the bill has undergone.
Baroness Jay of Paddington expressed regret over the heavy criticism faced by the House of Lords due to time-wasting activities and urged for timely passage of the bill to the Commons. Conversely, Lord Kevin Shinkwin argued against the bill’s quality and asserted that sufficient time had already been allocated.
Louise Shackleton stressed the importance of the bill for providing a compassionate option for terminally ill individuals. She highlighted the necessity for fair debate and prompt decision-making by the Lords to ensure the bill’s progression.
The decision to grant more time for scrutinizing the assisted dying bill was welcomed by advocates, hoping it would deter any further delays and facilitate constructive discussions leading to the bill’s approval.