More than 100 Labor MPs have called on Keir Starmer to stop the House of Lords from blocking the Assisted Dying Bill and give it more time to return to the Commons as the legislation is now certain to fail due to lack of time.
The private members’ bill, sponsored by Labor’s Kim Leadbeater, will fail when the parliamentary session ends in May because peers have used multiple amendments and lengthy debates to prevent it from coming to a vote.
Several ministerial assistants (parliamentary private secretaries) are also believed to have written to the prime minister separately. Ministers have told the Guardian that they have also put the case to Starmer, saying it would be a moment to show some leadership on an issue popular with the public, as well as a way to show that he will not allow the Lords to block the will of the elected Commons.
Opponents of the bill, who have tabled more than 1,200 amendments, say they are not deliberate obstructionism and are not fit for purpose. In a private letter to Starmer, Labor MPs wrote that he should ensure he returns to the House of Commons in the next session after the king’s speech.
If passed again in the Commons, it would mean supporters could use the Parliament Act to prevent any further blocking by the Lords. It would be the first time the Parliament Act 1911 has been invoked for a private member’s bill.
The letter said Starmer would not need to sacrifice the government’s neutrality on the issue itself and said it was a fundamental democratic principle that the Lords should not block the will of the Commons. The bill was approved by parliamentarians in June last year with a majority of 23 votes.
To use the Parliament Act, supporters would need to win the vote for a new private member’s bill or Starmer could agree to give the government time to allow it to be voted on again in the Commons.
The Lords have had more than 100 hours of debate but only half of the amendments have been covered after 11 days. There are only three more days allocated to the bill before the end of the session, where it would need to complete the report stage and third reading, as well as any amendments returned by the House of Commons. Supporters of the bill said this was “effectively impossible.”
Starmer is also understood to have received letters urging him to give time to the bill from Conservative, Liberal Democrat, Green, Plaid Cymru and Reform MPs, bringing the total number to around 150.
They maintain that only a small number of peers who oppose the bill have tabled the vast majority of the amendments, which are being debated at a glacial pace.
Lord Falconer, sponsor of the bill in the second chamber, said there was “no hope” of it being put on the statute book this session without a “fundamental change” in the tactics employed by its opponents.
The letter was coordinated by Peter Prinsley, consultant physician and MP for Bury St Edmunds and Stowmarket. “A small number of peers have been using procedural tactics to block the bill in the House of Lords and now look very likely to prevent it from returning to the House of Commons before the end of this session,” he wrote in the cover letter to the prime minister.
“While we fully respect the Government’s neutrality on the principle of assisted dying, we trust that you will agree with us that we cannot be neutral on the fundamental democratic principle that it is for the elected House of Commons to decide on this matter.
“Our constituents, in all parts of the country, strongly support a change in the law and we are clear that the issue must be resolved sooner rather than later. Our request is simple. That, regardless of whether the bill is passed again by private members after the king’s speech, there will be time for parliament to make a decision in the next session. It would remain a matter of conscience for MPs, the neutrality of the government would be maintained and it would not need to take time reserved for government business.”
MPs who opposed the bill said bringing it back would entrench its flaws. Labor MP Jess Asato said: “The bill’s sponsor has rejected 99% of the improvements and amendments suggested in the House of Lords and therefore it still contains the same flaws and problems. We know this to be true because experts, such as Royal Colleges and practitioners, have told the Lords as much.
“Any MP who voted to pass this bill would do so knowing it is unsafe and would harm vulnerable people.”
Starmer, who supports assisted dying, so far appears unwilling to interfere to help the bill progress. Liberal Democrat MP Vikki Slade said it would be a “travesty for democracy and, more importantly, a tragedy for all those who rely on the legislation and have waited so long, including my own father”.
Starmer said he would not interfere further in the parliamentary process. “It’s a matter of conscience,” the prime minister said last week. “It is for parliament to decide whether to pass legislation and any changes. Scrutiny is a matter for another party. We have a responsibility to ensure that any legislation is workable, effective and enforceable.”
