MPs urged not to get ‘bogged down’ in process of assisted dying Bill

The Government will work to make Labour MP Kim Leadbeater’s Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill “operable” if it is supported at its second reading, Ms Powell told the Commons.

Earlier, during Business questions, shadow Commons leader Jesse Norman accused the Government of trying to rush the Bill through “by proxy”.

MPs will have the opportunity to debate and are expected to vote on the proposed legislation on Friday.

Responding to a question from Labour MP Anna Dixon, Ms Powell said: “Should the Bill pass its second reading, the Government will work with the (amendment) sponsoring members to make sure this Bill is operable and is implementable.

“And will be implemented, should the House wish it to do so… that work will begin in earnest following the second reading debate. Should it not pass at second reading, that work would not happen at all.

“So that’s what I think Members should consider when considering the principles of this Bill, and not get too bogged down in some of the process.”

Ms Dixon, MP for Shipley in West Yorkshire, is a co-sponsor of a reasoned amendment to the Bill which calls for an independent review and a public consultation before it should return to the House for further debate.

Speaking from the Conservative front bench, Mr Norman accused the Government of proceeding with the Bill the “wrong way round”.

He told MPs: “Personally I feel very strongly pulled in both directions, by both sides, on the issue of assisted dying. But on one thing no-one can be in any doubt at all: that the Government has no business trying to rush this legislation through this House by proxy.

“The text of the Bill was published barely two weeks before we vote tomorrow. No impact assessment, and no legal issues analysis has been published.

“Far from public debate preceding legislation, legislation has preceded debate. This is completely the wrong way round.”

Ms Powell replied: “I think it is with some regret that (Mr Norman) has chosen this opportunity today to raise those matters in such a political – unnecessarily political – fashion.

“This is an issue that does generate very emotive responses on both sides and I hope that the conversations that we have tomorrow and the debate we have tomorrow can be conducted in a respectful, considerate, non-partisan, non-political (manner).”