Jack Abbott MP: speeches

Speeches

• 11 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is an intervention, Ms McVey. My plea to the hon. Member is to focus on exactly what the amendment states. I appreciate all the stories and examples that he wishes to make, but it is important to reflect on the words of the amendment. As I said, I am minded to support it.

• 11 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I completely understand what my hon. Friend is saying about what may need to happen in respect of medical intervention, but I gently point out that the amendment would not cover that. It does not spell out in any way, shape or form what a medical intervention would look like. It says that there needs to be a random discussion, but it does not lay out any sense of the medical intervention. I do not see how the amendment will do what my hon. Friend is looking for.

• 11 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend is saying that there is no mechanism to remove the voluntary assisted dying commissioner. Actually, paragraph 4(5) of new schedule 1 says: “The Secretary of State may by notice in writing remove a person from the office of Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner if satisfied that the person— (a) has behaved in a way that is not compatible with their continuing in office”— I think that addresses a lot of the concerns that she has been expressing— “or (b) is unfit, unable or unwilling to properly discharge their functions.” There is a mechanism in the new schedule that would give the Secretary of State the power to remove the commissioner.

• 6 Mar 2025 · English Football: Financial Sustainability and Governance · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Turner. No one in Ipswich is yet tired of reminding the world that we are now a premier league town. As I like to remind my colleagues in Essex and Norfolk in particular, we are the only premier league town in the east of England too. One of the biggest issues that gets raised with me on the doorstep is the regeneration of our town. Having a financially secure and sustainable football club goes a long way to advancing that agenda. The economic benefits to our town include thousands of people travelling into our town centre and filling up the pubs, restaurants and shops. It has been estimated that premier league status has brought a huge £200 million to our town this season alone. More than that, it speaks to our civic pride and the sense of community that has been brought to our town under the leadership of Mark Ashton off the field and Kieran McKenna on it. That has not always been the case. We, too, have seen our fair share of dark days and what poor leadership does when its rips out the sense of community and the links to businesses, academy players and so on. We have heard many examples today from Coventry, Portsmouth, Derby, Wigan, Reading—the list goes on and on. It is no exaggeration to say that when football clubs run into financial or other off-the-field issues, that impact is not just felt on the economy of the town; it has the potential to rip the heart and soul out of a place too. These clubs are not just commodities; they are our community’s crown jewels. Labour’s Football Governance Bill is a landmark moment for safeguarding a financially sustainable and well-governed football pyramid. If we get it right, the prizes on offer for Ipswich and towns across the country are immense.

• 6 Mar 2025 · Public Procurement: Support for SMEs · Hansard source

  More

  Recent figures show that hundreds of small businesses have been opening up across Ipswich, and I am proud that we are now ranked in the top 10 of areas in the country where the number of SMEs is growing. However, I am ambitious for my town and want to go further. What steps are the Government taking to ensure that, as part of our skills agenda, young people in towns such as Ipswich have the chance to find skilled, long-term, well-paid employment with SMEs, and, in doing so, boost public procurement and our local economy?

• 6 Mar 2025 · Public Procurement: Support for SMEs · Hansard source

  More

  12. What steps he is taking to support small and medium-sized enterprises in public procurement.

• 5 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Eighteenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I am grateful to my hon. Friend for supporting that amendment. We have often debated the level of detail that should be set out in the Bill. I fully appreciate that she does not want to include the whole training manual; I will not discuss my amendment, which concerns culture and trauma-informed care, because I recognise that it is much too detailed in that respect. However, does she agree that where possible, and where it does not create unintended consequences or loopholes, we should reassure not just colleagues across the House but members of the public, who want to see these sorts of thing on the face of the Bill?

• 5 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Eighteenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  To give the Committee a sense of clarity, is the hon. Gentleman saying he wants the finances to be in the public domain, so that if provision were to go down a private route, everyone would know what an individual is charging for these services? Or is he suggesting a cap on services? What is the intention of his amendments?

• 5 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Eighteenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  On a point of order, Mr Dowd. I think my hon. Friend the Member for Spen Valley said that if amendment (a) and amendment 186 are agreed to, that will negate the need for amendment 340. I seek clarity on whether that is the case.

• 5 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Nineteeth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  On the point about almost doubling the time of the so-called reflection period, I think we have been very fixated on the Committee, and rightly so, on the six-month limit for the terminal diagnosis, but we recognise that for many people it will be much less than that. A reflection period of two months for someone with a terminal diagnosis of three months is a critical problem.

• 5 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Nineteeth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  A lot of the conversations we have had in Committee have been about eliminating the lottery that exists in our healthcare system. What the hon. Gentleman is suggesting will be exactly that: a lottery according to each individual clinician and doctor.

• 5 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Nineteeth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The problem with the amendment, which has been mentioned before—I will not go as far as my hon. Friend the Member for Rother Valley and say that it would essentially nullify the Bill—is that it is entirely subjective. It is not guidance or a clear point of reference; it is entirely subjective to each individual doctor.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Fifteenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I apologise for the length of this intervention, Mrs Harris. The central point is that we have to recognise that this is an incredibly important piece of legislation and there is nothing wrong with being absolutely clear and stating the procedures that would have to be undertaken to pursue this.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Fifteenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend makes the case that some people will not be given the full range of medical options available to them. Presumably, though, the amendment would limit that even further, because they will not be able to understand assisted dying fully unless they have raised it themselves. We are actually restricting the full range of medical options for those people.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Fifteenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I completely hear everything my hon. Friend is saying, but we also to have accept that this is not like any other legislation. This is arguably one of the most seismic societal changes that we, as parliamentarians, are going to be passing. In my view, amendment 50 would not set a precedent that, for all future health legislation, we have to set out the clear procedures—

• 26 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Fifteenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Potentially. There are certain words and clauses on which everyone will come to very different conclusions. This has been the case throughout the entire Committee process, which is approaching its 16th sitting now. It has already been said that this provision could be tightened up, and I welcome the Ministers’ input in helping us to understand their position on aspects like this. In my view, there is nothing in amendment 50 that specifically says, “This would be an intrusive look at someone’s personal finances.” The measure—on the advice that would have to be given—is a proportionate one. Yes, it could be reasonably argued that proposed new subsection (2)(c) to clause 3, as set out in amendment 50, has already been covered under things that we have discussed extensively, such as coercive control and pressure. Equally, I do not think that any of the language in the amendment would necessarily overrule any other issues or make them more ambiguous. From that point of view, I will be supporting the amendment. I do not think there is anything in it that would override or lead to complications with any other part of the Bill, but it does put in black and white on the face of the Bill some of the very basic processes that should be happening. I appreciate that many of the points in amendment 50 are already happening or feature directly or implicitly in the Bill. However, I do not think there is any harm in the amendment; in fact, given the nature of what we are talking about and the fact that this legislation is unprecedented in this country, we should be very clear and direct. I do not think it will lead to confusion for our medical profession. These are straightforward and common-sense asks. On that basis, I will be supporting this amendment.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Fifteenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  My hon. Friend makes a powerful point, but I would gently point out, as has been said already this afternoon, that the conversations between doctor and patient will not be that straightforward. A range of options will be presented to the patients. I do not think it would be a case of “Here is the option of assisted dying. This is your only option.” There will be a huge range of options on the table, as is right and proper.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Fifteenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I will speak specifically to amendment 50. I fully appreciate and accept the points made on a number of occasions during this debate by my hon. Friend the Member for Stroud—that many proposed changes either already feature in the Bill or are the current course of practice for doctors and other medical professionals. As I have said previously, I am not generally in the business of supporting amendments that, in my view, overcomplicate issues, are ambiguous and could lead to other consequences or are simply repetitious, but I do not think that amendment 50 would do those things. Some proposed amendments are featured in the Bill, either directly or implicitly, but I do not see how amendment 50 would overcomplicate or lead to ambiguity. It is a quite direct and, dare I say, common-sense ask that we should all support. I take the point made by the right hon. Member for North West Hampshire on proposed new subsection (2)(f) of clause 3, as inserted by amendment 50, though I confess I did not read it in the same way that he did. I read it as saying that anyone looking to go down this route should be made aware of the legal consequences. That is a sensible suggestion. I do not expect a doctor would be going into people’s bank accounts or deeply understanding their legal affairs, but due consideration, advice and information should be imparted to the person who is applying. That is how I read it; I did not think it would be a hugely intrusive, in-depth study into a person’s personal finances.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Fourteenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Essentially, the amendment would require that if a person is autistic or has a learning disability, they must be given accessible information and sufficient time to consider it. Additionally, there must be at least either a supporter or an independent advocate there. That amendment was tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford and will be discussed later.

• 26 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Fourteenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Upcoming amendment 339 to clause 4 addresses that specific point. The hon. Gentleman has been asked this a number of times today, but would he be satisfied if that amendment was passed?

• 25 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twelfth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I say gently to the hon. Member that—particularly on the previous clause—I have been very sympathetic to several of the amendments. Candidly, however, with due respect to all the hon. Members across the House who submitted this, I do not think that they have been particularly well written. I think that they leave quite a lot of ambiguity in a lot of areas. We had a discussion in the week before the recess, on a number of areas, about the word “only”. I heard it suggested earlier that the principle is about the spirit in which things are taken. The reality is that I am very sympathetic to a lot of what is proposed, but a number of the amendments leave quite a lot of open ends. That has been a particular issue. I have been very open and have said that in principle I am supportive of assisted dying, but that I could not support it because the Bill was not strong enough in its current state. I do not think that the amendments tabled so far will strengthen the Bill; in fact, they might leave a lot of open ends, despite the very good intentions behind a lot of them.

• 25 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twelfth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I did articulate a number of times where I felt that some of the amendments were not tight enough in those areas.

• 25 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Thirteenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Most of the discussion on amendment 181 has centred on the word “only”. Just to get clarification on this point, would someone with an eating disorder who was later diagnosed with a terminal illness still be able to access an assisted death, if that were required under the amendment?

• 25 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Thirteenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  A line has to be drawn in the sand somewhere. Will the hon. Member define what an adequate timeline would look like for him to be satisfied?

• 25 Feb 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Thirteenth sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Just to be absolutely clear for everyone in the room, and in case I was not specific enough, if that terminal illness is a result of the eating disorder, rather than, say, of that person also being diagnosed with a terminal illness such as cancer, would they be covered under amendment 181?