Kim Leadbeater MP: speeches

Speeches

• 12 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I might have misheard, but I believe the hon. Member asked what happens when a patient asks for assisted death not as a result of illness. If that was the case, then they would not fall under the criteria of the Bill.

• 12 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I am interested in exploring the characterisation of the two sides referred to, because this is not about two sides. This is about an individual patient with a terminal illness. I am just interested in how we can explore that a little further.

• 12 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The other point I would reiterate is that none of that stops happening. We have heard from professionals and experts that that happens. Someone who has cancer will have a multidisciplinary team around them as part of their natural treatment process. Nothing in the Bill stops that happening.

• 12 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The quick answer is that there would be an injunction. I hope my hon. Friend will also be reassured that the panel is coming towards the end of this very long process. In the situation he describes, the patient would have gone through all the other stages with the doctor. I imagine in that situation, in a psychiatric referral, the doctor would have said, “Would you consider speaking to your next of kin?” There are a lot of other stages prior to getting to this point, which I hope provides some reassurance.

• 12 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I will stand corrected if this is not true, but my understanding is that Hansard will show a very different story. I do not think that 60 people got up and said on record that this element was why they were voting for the Bill.

• 12 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The amendments serve simply to set out clearly what the regulations must include with regard to the second declaration and the subsequent statement from the co-ordinating doctor. They replace the schedules and are consistent with the advice I have received that matters of this nature are not suitable for the face of the Bill. They are simple and straightforward amendments.

• 12 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  We have had two of them already.

• 12 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Gentleman give way one more time?

• 12 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  A strong argument has been made to me that the professionals on the panel would have the skills and training to fulfil their role, but it is important, particularly given the time we have spent discussing this issue, that they do have it, so I am happy to support that amendment.

• 12 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the hon. Gentleman for giving way again; I will sit down after this. I will not take it too personally that he thinks I have done a very poor job, but the point is that we heard a broad range of evidence from professionals including legal experts, medical experts, psychiatrists and social workers—lots of different people. We have also had evidence come in over recent weeks and months that has added to that and has talked about these changes. It is important to acknowledge that.

• 12 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I will check.

• 12 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  If needed.

• 12 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  To clarify, the point that I am making is that there is a range of views across a range of organisations—many of which are neutral on the issue of assisted dying, full stop—and a range of views within each profession. We heard evidence from people working in palliative care with different views, and from medical people with different views. It is important to acknowledge that.

• 12 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The reports for the case would go to the commissioner, so he or she would see the reports.

• 12 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Does the hon. Gentleman agree that that is exactly the point? This is a unique situation, and therefore we need a unique system. That is the perfect opportunity to use the skills that a judge or retired judge has.

• 12 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I understand the hon. Member’s framing of this and it might very well be his perspective, but there were 650 MPs who voted on Second Reading that day, so I think it is unfair to represent colleagues who did not have the view that this is the central component of the Bill. There are lots of other components to the Bill that colleagues have certainly spoken to me about, and it is important to acknowledge that.

• 12 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  We have already talked about this, and I think the hon. Gentleman mentioned it himself: there is a similar situation with public inquiries, on which a judge sits because of their skillset and who they are, but not necessarily in a traditional judicial capacity.

• 12 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  That is another important argument for having the panel. Where a terminally ill person with an eating disorder has been deemed to have capacity by two doctors and—I surmise, as we now have the compulsory referral—a psychiatrist, we will have on the panel another psychiatrist and a social worker. The panel does help to address concerns about capacity. Does the Minister agree?

• 12 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  The hon. Gentleman is been very generous with his time. I am interested in how he can conclude that the eligibility criteria have somehow been expanded by adding an expert panel with a psychiatrist and a social worker.

• 12 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  I am not entirely sure who the hon. Gentleman is referring to, but it is fair to say that there is a range of views across a range of professions. It is important to acknowledge that.

• 12 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  There is a judge—it may be a retired judge—who is the commissioner, who heads up the entire assisted dying commission, and there is a legal expert on the panel as well, as the hon. Gentleman said. That could be a retired judge, so there is legal expertise there. I think the hon. Gentleman also made the point that there is not a doctor on the panel. My understanding is that psychiatrists are doctors, but I will stand corrected if that is not true.

• 12 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Will the hon. Gentleman give way on that point?

• 12 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is really important to be clear about this. I do not think anyone is suggesting that what is in the Bill will replace existing good practice. That is really important. We probably all have family and friends who are being treated for cancer now, and they are looked after and cared for by a multidisciplinary team. That team does not suddenly disappear, to be replaced by what is in the Bill; it can continue. The assisted dying option involves the two doctors, and I struggle to envisage any situation in which they would not work with the multidisciplinary team and add on, where appropriate and necessary, psychiatric intervention, social care and healthcare professionals. I always come back to the point that I do not think the two things will operate independently.

• 12 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  We have all been told off, and quite rightly. I thank colleagues for another powerful, robust and thorough debate on this important subject. I thank the Minister for providing such an excellent and clear description of the changes to clause 12 that I have proposed this afternoon—I will not repeat that description. The Bill is already the strongest of its kind anywhere in the world. My amendments will make it even more robust. As we have heard, the Bill is much safer than the existing ban on assisted dying, which leaves terminally ill people and their families without any such protections at all. The proposal to have a multidisciplinary panel, appointed by a judge, to examine each request, following earlier assessments by two independent doctors and, where necessary, a psychiatrist, reflects the expert testimony we have heard during our proceedings. It strengthens the Bill by adding more varied expertise to the decision-making process, with judicial oversight, and it includes an important monitoring and reporting function in the commissioner. My amendments show the Committee process working exactly as it should, reflecting on evidence from the UK and around the world, and making a strong Bill even stronger. I appreciate that, for procedural reasons, we will not vote on the replacement of clause 12 until the new clauses are put, but I am encouraged that colleagues have offered positive responses and comments to the proposal for a commissioner and a multidisciplinary panel, regardless of how they voted on Second Reading. That tells me that, whatever our views on the Bill, there is a shared commitment to getting protections for terminally ill adults right, which means that we are doing our job. Amendment (c) to new schedule 2 was tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Lowestoft (Jess Asato). I was pleased to support my hon. Friend’s amendment on additional training on domestic abuse, coercive control and financial abuse for doctors who take part in the assisted dying process. As members appointed to the panel will already be very well qualified in the fields of law, psychiatry and social work, I am confident that they will have the necessary expertise to determine referrals, but I appreciate the challenges in detecting the subtleties of coercion, as the Committee has discussed at length. As such, I support amendment (c). Amendment (a) to new schedule 2 was tabled by the right hon. Member for Dwyfor Meirionnydd. I am fully supportive of her position on ensuring accessibility and equality for Welsh speakers, but in this instance I have some concerns about the barrier her amendment may create for patients in accessing the assisted dying process in a timely manner, and therefore about the workability of the amendment. Under the Welsh Language Act 1993, as the Minister said, all public bodies operating in Wales must create a Welsh language scheme with the aim of ensuring that Welsh and English are treated equally in all aspects of public service delivery. The Ministry of Justice’s Welsh language scheme, for example, sets out where services can be provided in Welsh, typically through translation services. I take on board the right hon. Lady’s comments about the limitations of using translators. Given the sensitivity of the conversations and deliberations we are discussing, we need to be sensitive to that. It is, of course, the patient’s prerogative to request a fully Welsh-speaking panel, if that is what they want at such a difficult time—as long as they are made aware of the potential delays this may or may not create. That is my concern. My reading of amendment (a) is that it is not the right hon. Lady’s intention that this will be required in every case. However, it will ensure a very patient-centred approach, in which I believe passionately. I take on board the Minister’s concerns, which I appreciate may need to be considered further down the line, but I am minded to support amendment (a) to new schedule 2. Finally, amendment (e) to new clause 21, tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Filton and Bradley Stoke (Claire Hazelgrove), in on audio and video material. I think this comes from a really personal, sensitive and important place, and demonstrates a very patient-centred approach, so I am also minded to support it this afternoon. I would welcome the clarity from the Minister regarding some of the legal language and terminology around other amendments, and as such, I will not be supporting them this afternoon. We have had another thorough debate, and I welcome the contributions from colleagues across the Committee.

• 12 Mar 2025 · Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Twenty-third sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Roger. It was a delight to see the mum of the hon. Member for East Wiltshire. Sadly, I think she is no longer in the Public Gallery, but I hope they had a really good chat.