Peers approve fast-tracked scrutiny for assisted dying bill in Lords
A select committee of about a dozen peers will examine funding, health-system impacts and professional roles as the bill advances in the Lords.
Peers in the House of Lords agreed to a fast-tracked select committee to scrutinise the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, paving the way for its passage through the Lords. The agreement comes as the legislation, which would allow terminally ill adults in England and Wales with fewer than six months to live to apply for an assisted death subject to two doctors’ approvals and a panel including a social worker, a senior legal figure and a psychiatrist, faced two days of debate that began last week.
The new committee is expected to comprise roughly a dozen peers and will report to the Lords by November 7. Its remit includes examining how an assisted-dying service would be funded, the potential impact on the health and justice systems, and the roles of coroners and various medical professionals in the process. A prime aim is to provide evidence for detailed scrutiny without risking the bill’s collapse due to time constraints.
Lord Charlie Falconer, the bill’s sponsor in the Lords, had previously resisted an amendment from Baroness Luciana Berger for a special committee with no fixed end date, warning it could delay the bill. In a joint letter with Baroness Berger, Falconer said the new arrangement was a "constructive and sensible compromise" and that the bill "now has time to go through all its stages in the Lords." The letter argues that additional evidence can be gathered before the whole-House Committee stage without creating a significant risk of failure.
Baroness Glenys Thornton, a Labour peer, urged peers to show compassion and focus on improving the bill through scrutiny rather than obstruction. She said the measure deserved consideration because it reflects the wishes of a majority of the UK public and even some Church of England congregations, despite leadership opposition within the church. Thornton criticized the notion that protecting the sanctity of life required terminally ill people to endure a distressing and painful death against their will, arguing that the bill would shorten suffering rather than life.
Conservative Lord John Deben voiced concerns that the bill had been "inadequately dealt with" in the Commons, noting it was a private members’ bill and had drawn criticism from Westminster committees. He warned that the proposal could, in effect, empower the State to kill and warned of potential coercion, with fears that families might press dying relatives to opt for assisted dying to pass on money or assets.
If the Lords and Commons agree on the final wording, assisted dying would become law only after both chambers approve it. The government would then have four years to establish a functioning service, potentially delaying the first assisted death until 2029 or 2030. The debate has already highlighted deep constitutional questions about how such a sensitive policy should be scrutinised and implemented, with opponents including former prime minister and now Baroness Theresa May warning of a possible "licence to kill". The current session’s timetable adds pressure to finish before the spring adjournment, as peers worry about running out of time.
The process now moves toward a fast-tracked select committee to gather evidence, with the expectation that it would report in time to keep the bill’s progress on track. Friday afternoon is typically when a motion to agree Second Reading would be considered, though it is not always put to a vote in the Lords. If the measure advances, the bill would move to the Commons for consideration of final wording before becoming law. Until then, the debate continues to hinge on how best to balance compassion for the terminally ill with safeguards intended to prevent abuse or coercion.
