The assisted dying debate has been wholly unsatisfactory so far

For a change of such magnitude
For a change of such magnitude

During Friday’s debate on assisted dying, Jake Richards – Labour MP for Rother Valley, and co-sponsor of the Bill – said the proceedings showed “Parliament at its best”. This is an incorrect assessment.

That the discussion was carried out in civil fashion does not mean it was a good debate. Due to the tight confines of the alloted time – with just five hours allocated to the Bill at second reading – a great many MPs who wished to contribute were unable to do so, with James Cleverly suggesting the number blocked from speaking was “well over 100”. Those who were able to speak, meanwhile, frequently found their time severely limited.

Set aside the contents of the Leadbeater Bill. Parliament is sovereign, and can legislate as it chooses; MPs may make up their minds as they so wish. What is undeniable is that our representatives are owed time to speak and consider in order to execute their function as best they are able to do so.

From this perspective, the conduct of this Bill has been deeply unsatisfactory. Members had a little under three weeks to familiarise themselves with the 38 pages of the Bill before it was debated in the Commons. That some MPs appeared to err in discussing the specifics of the legislation is testament to the point that more time and preparation would have been valuable.

A great deal of the blame for this rushed state of affairs lies with Sir Keir Starmer. The Prime Minister had previously indicated that he would provide time for a private member’s bill on the matter. However, he chose not to provide additional time beyond the five hours allocated, and as the Bill was proposed by a backbench MP there was no programme of public engagement or review prior to the tabling of legislation. As others have noted, to have the debate only once the law is proposed is somewhat backwards, and it is hard not to suspect that Sir Keir is playing games in order to pass legislation without having to put the Government’s imprimatur upon it.

For now, Parliament has voted, and the Bill will proceed to the committee. David Davis MP, who voted in favour, has called on the Government to give the Bill four days of debate before its final vote. The Government has indicated that it has no intention of doing so. For a change of such magnitude this is manifestly unacceptable. Sir Keir must do the right thing, and give MPs more time to do their jobs.