by Charles Moore, Telegraph
Lord Falconer’s plan to invoke the Parliament Act for a private members’ bill risks exposing deep Labour divisions
I have read in the media – even in the New York Times – that the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, which fell in the House of Lords last Friday, was blocked by a tightly knit group of only seven peers.
This claim surprised me. I took part in almost all 13 committee-stage all-day debates on the bill, yet I failed to notice this sinister conspiracy.
Indeed, as a critic of the bill, I felt part of something very loosely knit. As well as out-and-out opponents of the bill, there were many who sympathised with or did not comment on the principle but found the details unsafe.
Many were experts, such as Lord Stevens of Birmingham, the former head of the National Health Service (NHS) and Lord Lansley, a former health secretary. Disabled peers too were unanimous in their anxiety. All were strong on how the bill, whatever its theory, would in practice be a nightmare for the NHS.
Private members’ bills are always debated on Fridays and usually thinly attended. All through the assisted suicide marathon, however, there was high attendance, particularly of the opponents.
If you add up those who were moving amendments, those lending their names to amendments and those speaking, you get 131 active opponents of the bill, a high number by any standard. Some were accused of “filibustering”, but a filibuster is when one or two members keep speaking for hour upon hour in order to break a bill. In this case, the average length was seven minutes. Almost all the speeches were to the point.
On the other side, there was a curious reluctance, except for the indefatigable mover of the bill, Lord Falconer of Thoroton, to engage in the scrutiny which the committee stage is for. I counted very few of its supporters – shall we say seven? – who constantly attended and spoke. Almost all were peers who took their titles – baronesses of Kentish Town, of Paddington, of Kennington, of Stoke Newington – from the small and shrinking part of Britain where the Starmer world-view prevails.
The bill progressed – or rather did not progress – from a brief period when Sir Keir’s backing was considered the most desirable endorsement, to the present when it has become unmentionable. A huge Left-liberal majority arrived in the House of Commons in July 2024, but its authority has since suffered a sort of nervous breakdown. The results of the local elections on May 7 are expected to complete that mental collapse.