
UK MPs vote in favour of assisted dying Bill in historic step
LONDON, June 21 — Britain's parliament took a historic step towards allowing euthanasia yesterday when MPs backed contentious legislation that would introduce assisted dying for terminally ill people.
Lawmakers in the lower House of Commons chamber voted 314 in favour to 291 to send the proposal to the upper House of Lords for further scrutiny following four hours of emotional debate.
The outcome sparked celebrations among supporters gathered outside parliament who say legalised euthanasia will give people with an incurable illness dignity and choice at the end of their lives.
But opponents attending a neighbouring counter-protest said they feared vulnerable people could be coerced into dying and urged lawmakers to focus on improving palliative care instead.
The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill would allow assisted suicide in England and Wales for adults who have been given less than six months to live.
They would have to be able to administer the life-ending substance themselves, and any patient's wish to die would have to be signed off by two doctors and a panel of experts.
A change in the law would see Britain emulate several other countries in Europe and elsewhere that allow some form of assisted dying, including Belgium and the Netherlands.
'Heartbreaking stories'
Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, who proposed the legislation, told yesterday's so-called third reading debate that a law change would 'offer a compassionate and safe choice' for terminally ill people.
She said maintaining the status quo would mean more 'heartbreaking stories' of 'pain and trauma, suicide attempts, PTSD, lonely trips to Switzerland, (and) police investigations'.
But Vicky Foxcroft, also of Labour, said the proposal did not include adequate safeguards for disabled people.
'We have to protect those people who are susceptible to coercion, who already feel like society doesn't value them, who often feel like a burden to the state, society and their family,' she pleaded.
Outside parliament, protesters waved placards with slogans including 'Let us choose' and 'Don't make doctors killers'.
David Walker, 82, said he supported changing the law because he saw his wife of 60 years suffer for three years at the end of her life.
'That's why I'm here, because I can't help her anymore, but I can help other people who are going through the same thing, because if you have no quality of life, you have nothing,' he told AFP.
But Elizabeth Burden, a 52-year-old doctor, said she feared the legislation would open 'slippery slope' where those eligible for assisted dying expands.
'Once we allow this. Everything will slip down because dementia patients, all patients... are vulnerable,' she told AFP.
Public support
MPs in the 650-seat parliament backed an earlier version of the proposed legislation by 330 to 275 votes at an initial vote in parliament last November, a larger majority than yesterday's 23.
Since then, the Bill has undergone several changes, including applying a ban on adverts for assisted dying and allowing all health workers to opt out of helping someone end their life.
MPs added a safeguard which would prevent a person being eligible 'solely as a result of voluntarily stopping eating or drinking', ruling out people with anorexia.
Britain's medical community and Prime Minister Keir Starmer's top ministerial team are split on the proposed law change. Starmer voted in favour, while his health and justice secretaries opposed it.
But in a YouGov poll of 2,003 adults, surveyed last month and published Thursday, 73 per cent or respondents backed an assisted dying law.
'Change is coming,' hailed Sarah Wootton, chief executive of the Dignity in Dying campaign group.
But Catherine Robinson of Right To Life UK insisted the Bill 'still faces an uphill battle' to get through the Lords and her opposition campaign group 'will be fighting it at every stage' to prevent it becoming law.
The House of Lords now needs to approve the legislation before the end of the current parliamentary year, likely in the autumn, or the Bill will fail.
If it passes and receives royal assent, it would still be four years before an assisted dying service was implemented.
A government impact assessment published this month estimated that approximately 160 to 640 assisted deaths could take place in the first year, rising to a possible 4,500 in a decade.
Assisted suicide currently carries a maximum prison sentence of 14 years in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.
Separate legislation is going through the devolved Scottish parliament.
At the end of March, the Isle of Man became the first British territory to pass an assisted dying Bill. — AFP
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Malay Mail
an hour ago
- Malay Mail
Palestinian rights group loses legal fight to block UK from supplying components for Israeli F-35 warplanes
LONDON, June 30 — The High Court in London rejected a legal challenge today brought by a Palestinian rights group seeking to block the UK from supplying components for Israeli F-35 fighter jets. Israel has used the jets to devastating effect in its bombardment of Gaza. Both sides have been accused of atrocities during a conflict that has killed tens of thousands -- the vast majority of them Palestinian civilians, according to figures the United Nations deems reliable. The UK government suspended some export licences for military equipment after concluding there was a risk Israel could be breaching international humanitarian law but made an exemption for some parts for Lockheed Martin F-35 stealth jets. In its claim to the High Court, rights group Al-Haq called for a judicial review, saying the 'carve out' was unlawful and alleging the government had misunderstood the applicable rules of international law. It was supported by Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Oxfam and others in its case. Judges Stephen Males and Karen Steyn said they 'reject all' of the grounds for challenging the government's decision. The case was not about 'whether the UK should supply arms or other military equipment to Israel', said the judges. Rather, the case was concerned with 'whether it is open to the court to rule that the UK must withdraw from a specific multilateral defence collaboration' because of the prospect that some UK manufactured components may be used by Israel in the Gaza war in actions that could break international humanitarian law. 'Under our constitution that acutely sensitive and political issue is a matter for the executive, which is democratically accountable to parliament, and ultimately to the electorate, not for the courts,' said the judges. 'Once the true nature of the issue is identified, it is clear that the claim must fail. Accordingly, permission to bring a judicial review claim is refused,' they added. Shawan Jabarin, General Director of Al-Haq said in a statement issued to AFP: 'By exposing serious government failings in facilitating international crimes against Palestinians through its arms exports, civil society and human rights organisations have achieved a crucial breakthrough. 'We will continue to persevere in the UK and beyond until governments are held accountable. Israel's impunity is challenged and justice for the Palestinian people is realised,' he added. 'Loophole' The UK contributes components to an international defence programme that produces and maintains the F-35s. Defence Secretary John Healey argued a suspension would impact the 'whole F-35 programme' and have a 'profound impact on international peace and security'. Lawyers for Al-Haq said the government had known there was a 'clear risk' Israel would use the jet parts to commit violations of international law. But government lawyer James Eadie said the court was not placed to rule on the legality of Israel's actions, and that attempting to do so could have a 'potentially deleterious' effect on 'foreign relations with a friendly state, namely Israel'. In September 2024, the new Labour government announced it was suspending around 30 of 350 export licences following a review of Israel's compliance with international humanitarian law. But the partial ban did not cover British-made F-35 parts, which include refuelling probes, laser targeting systems, tyres and ejector seats, according to Oxfam. Healey has previously said suspending F-35 licences would 'undermine US confidence in the UK and NATO' but lawyers for Al-Haq have described the exemption as a 'loophole'. UK-based NGO Campaign Against Arms Trade has said that licencing figures showed the government had made a 'shocking increase in military exports to Israel' in the months after its September 2024 announcement of partial suspensions. It said the figures showed the UK approved £127.6 million (RM715 million) in military equipment to Israel in single-issue licences from October to December 2024, saying this was more than for the period from 2020 to 2023 combined. Most of the licences were for military radars, components and software, as well as targeting equipment, according to the NGO, which was involved in the case against the government. Israel launched war on Gaza after an attack by militants from Palestinian group Hamas on October 7, 2023, which resulted in the deaths of 1,219 people, mostly civilians, according to an AFP tally based on Israeli official figures. Israel's retaliatory campaign has killed at least 56,500 people in Gaza, an occupied Palestinian territory, most of them civilians, according to the territory's health ministry. The UN considers these figures to be reliable. — AFP


Malay Mail
2 hours ago
- Malay Mail
BBC says regrets letting Glastonbury ‘death to the IDF' chant go live, accuses rap duo Bob Vylan of ‘antisemitism'
LONDON, June 30 — British public broadcaster the BBC apologised today for not pulling a live stream of a British punk-rap group's performance at the Glastonbury music festival after they made anti-Israel remarks. 'With hindsight we should have pulled the stream during the performance. We regret this did not happen,' the broadcaster said of Bob Vylan's show, in which the group led the crowds in chants of 'Death to the IDF', the initials of the Israeli military. Prime Minister Keir Starmer said on the weekend there was 'no excuse for this kind of appalling hate speech'. The BBC said that 'millions of people' watched their coverage of the festival 'but one performance within our livestreams included comments that were deeply offensive'. 'The BBC respects freedom of expression but stands firmly against incitement to violence,' it added. 'The antisemitic sentiments expressed by Bob Vylan were utterly unacceptable and have no place on our airwaves.' Media watchdog Ofcom said Monday it was 'very concerned' and that the BBC clearly had questions to answer. 'We have been speaking to the BBC over the weekend and we are obtaining further information as a matter of urgency,' it added. — AFP


Free Malaysia Today
2 hours ago
- Free Malaysia Today
BBC regrets not stopping live stream of Bob Vylan's Glastonbury set
Bob Vylan's performance at Glastonbury included chants against the Israeli military. (PA/AP pic) LONDON : Britain's BBC said it regretted not stopping the live stream of punk-rap duo Bob Vylan's set at Glastonbury after the performance included chants against the Israeli military, drawing condemnation from British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. The BBC has come under fire for allowing the performance to be shown live on Saturday as a Bob Vylan member led the crowd in chanting 'death, death to the IDF', a reference to the Israel Defense Forces, following chants of 'free, free Palestine'. The BBC, which broadcasts the festival in southwest England, issued a warning on screen while the set was being streamed online, but said today it should have gone further. The comments were 'utterly unacceptable and have no place on our airwaves', the national broadcaster said in a statement. 'The team were dealing with a live situation but with hindsight we should have pulled the stream during the performance,' the BBC added. 'We regret this did not happen.' The BBC said it would look at its guidance around live events so that in future its teams were clear on what is acceptable content to be shown.