Assisted dying bill vote: Latest updates as MPs BACK right-to-die choice for terminally ill adults after emotional five-hour debate in Commons

Dame Esther Rantzen’s daughter Rebecca Wilcox has told Times Radio the vote to approve the assisted dying bill left her in ‘shock’ as she described the decision as ‘huge’.

The broadcaster is a high-profile campaigner for assisted dying and previously revealed she joined Dignitas, the Swiss clinic, after a terminal lung cancer diagnosis.

Speaking to presenter Ayesha Hazarika, her daughter Rebecca said she was ‘utterly bamboozled’ by the Commons debate which she described as ‘most brilliant respectful process’.

She added:

I felt at times that I wanted to scream and shout and I was really pleased.

I brought a notebook (to Parliament) where I could just write the swear words that I wanted to say. But at the moment I don’t know who I am and what I am but I’m just so relieved so relieved that common sense prevailed.

A spokesperson for Sir Keir Starmer said that the Government’s position on assisted dying ‘remains neutral’.

The Prime Minister has not publicly declared his position but Commons data shows he backed passing the legislation this afternoon

His spokesperson said:

As is a matter of public record, the Prime Minister voted for the Assisted Dying Private Members’ Bill. The Government’s position remains neutral, and we will respect the will of Parliament.

Conservative former prime minister Rishi Sunak said he voted for the Bill as he believed it would help to ‘reduce suffering’.

Writing for the Darlington and Stockton Times – his local newspaper – the Conservative MP for Richmond and Northallerton said:

On Friday, after much thought, I voted for the assisted dying Bill. This was a free vote, with MPs, rightly, allowed to follow their consciences, not the party line. MPs of all stripes voted for, and against, this change. There were people I am proud to call friends and whom I deeply admire in both lobbies.

I believe that, where possible, we should prevent suffering. I know from speaking and listening to many of you, that too many people have to go through painful, traumatic, drawn-out deaths.

These moving, deeply personal stories have left a profound impression on me. This Bill will make these ordeals, which are so traumatic for patients and their families, less frequent: it will reduce suffering.

Mr Sunak described himself as a “religious person” and said he understood the ‘deep moral and philosophical concerns that many people have about this issue’ which he said had divided opinion in his own family.

In an open letter to his constituents, Foreign Secretary David Lammy explained why he had voted against the Bill.

He recalled the experience of his mother, writing:

Like millions of working-class people, her final diagnosis filled her not with a fear of death but a fear of being a burden to her family.

That is a financial burden on her then struggling family. Mum, in her final months, treasured every moment she spent with us. But I worry, sadly, that if she had the option of assisted dying, she would have felt pressure to take it.

Division list analysis shows that Labour MP Emma Hardy voted in both the aye and no lobby to register a formal abstention.

In a statement put out on Friday, the MP for Kingston upon Hull West and Haltemprice said it was a ‘deeply personal issue’ for her and ‘one that I have struggled with’.

It strikes at the heart of my fundamental desire to both ease suffering and protect the most vulnerable in society – goals that, at times, seem to conflict in these discussions. The stories of horrific deaths are heart-breaking, and my instinct is to find a way to end suffering. But I have to ask myself, and all of us: Is assisted dying truly the right answer?

I believe that everyone deserves dignity in dying, and that every person has the right to a good death. Unfortunately, the law as it stands today is inconsistent. For instance, people who travel abroad for assisted dying face the threat of prosecution, while at home, the only option available to hasten death is the withdrawal of food and water.

Despite these inconsistencies, I have serious concerns about the Bill currently before Parliament. I do not believe it fully addresses the complex realities of a legal right to assisted dying.

After listing her concerns, Ms Hardy said:

While these concerns have made me lean towards voting against the Bill, I have chosen to abstain. My reason for this is simple: voting against it at this stage could close down the debate for another decade. To record my active abstention I had to vote both for and against this bill, which is why my name will appear on both lists.

MPs today voted for the Assisted Dying Bill amid tense scenes in the House of Commons by a margin of 55 votes.

During the nearly five-hour debate, parliamentarians discussed the controversial measure which, according to opinion polls, has a majority of the public’s support.

The government has committed to making Labour MP Kim Leadbeater’s Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill ‘operable’ in the event that MPs supported the proposal, which they did this afternoon by 330 votes to 275.

• Read the full story here and use our tool to see how your MP voted

Danny Kruger, the first speaker to oppose the Bill in the Commons, told Sky News he was ‘very disappointed it had passed its second reading.

The Conservative MP for East Wiltshire added:

I am very sorry that I and others didn’t persuade enough others to win, but what really did come across is everyone agrees we need to improve palliative care, which is my main concern.

Mr Kruger indicated he was likely to vote against the Bill again in future.

Former prime minister Rishi Sunak has voted in support of the assisted dying Bill, meanwhile Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch has voted against.

Shadow chancellor Mel Stride, shadow home secretary Chris Philp, and shadow education secretary Laura Trott voted in support of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill at its second reading.

Among those voting against the Bill were shadow foreign secretary Priti Patel, shadow justice secretary Robert Jenrick, and shadow work and pensions secretary Helen Whately. The Conservative shadow health secretary Edward Argar also voted against the Bill.

Commons data shows the list of shadow ministers who voted for assisted dying:

• Mel Stride
• Chris Philp
• Laura Trott
• James Cartlidge
• Victoria Atkins

And here’s a list of shadow ministers who voted against it

• Kemi Badenoch
• Richard Fuller
• Priti Patel
• Alex Burghart
• Helen Whately
• Andrew Griffith
• Claire Coutinho
• Robert Jenrick
• Edward Argar
• Stuart Andrew
• Gareth Bacon
• Alan Mak
• Mims Davies
• Andrew Bowie
• Jesse Norman

We can now reveal which members of the Cabinet voted for and against assisted dying legislation, according to Commons data.

The divisions in Labour’s top team were reported in the run-up to today’s vote so let’s see who backed the legislation and who opposed it.

• Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer
• Chancellor Rachel Reeves
• Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster Pat McFadden
• Home Secretary Yvette Cooper
• Defence Secretary John Healey
• Energy Security and Net Zero Secretary Ed Miliband
• Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall
• Science Innovation and Technology Secretary Peter Kyle
• Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander
• Environment Secretary Steve Reed
• Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy
• Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn
• Welsh Secretary Jo Stevens
• Commons Leader Lucy Powell

• Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner
• Foreign Secretary David Lammy
• Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood
• Health Secretary Wes Streeting
• Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson
• Business and Trade Secretary Jonathan Reynolds.

*There was no vote recorded for Secretary of State for Scotland Ian Murray

Conservative MP Kit Malthouse, one of the Bill’s main supporters, has warned there is still ‘a long way to go’ before assisted dying becomes law.

The former minister, who co-sponsored the Bill, told the PA news agency:

It’s been a 10-year project for me since the last vote in 2015. It’s just been brilliant to support Kim to get it through.

But there’s still a long way to go, there’s still a lot more to do.

Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, the Bill’s sponsor, said there was plenty of time to get it right as it underwent further scrutiny in Parliament.

She told the BBC:

We have shown Parliament in its best light today. Very respectful, very compassionate debate, irrespective of the different views that people hold.

We take the Bill to the next stage now, we continue the process and it will be a very thorough process but we also have to champion all the issues that have been talked about today, whether that is palliative care, whether that is the rights of disabled people, the NHS. All those things are important.

Spen Valley MP Ms Leadbeater said a ‘thorough, robust’ committee would now work to make the Bill ‘the best it possible can be’.

Amid concerns about rushing the Bill through the Commons, she said it could face another six months of parliamentary scrutiny, adding:

There is plenty of time to get this right.

Dame Esther Rantzen described Kim Leadbeater (pictured) as an ‘extraordinary person’ following the introduction of her bill in Parliament this afternoon.

She told PA:

She has a complete mastery of the facts. She knows exactly which are the most crucial points. She put it all very clearly, taking interventions all the way through, and answering them without ever losing the thread of her argument.

I was lost in admiration. She’s an extraordinary person. I was also very moved by the various doctors who took part, who gave painful but important descriptions of the kinds of death people suffer, which cannot be eased by even the best palliative care, and I’m sure their interventions were crucial.

We can now bring you the first pictures of pro-choice campaigners celebrating outside Parliament as MPs backed a vote on assisted dying legislation passing through the Commons.

Supporters of the Bill wept and hugged each other outside Parliament as the news came through that it had been passed by MPs.

The crowd in Parliament Square erupted into cheers as they watched the results on their phones.

Pro-change campaigners said the vote in favour of assisted dying will leave thousands of people ‘heartened’.

Trevor Moore, chairman of My Death, My Decision said:

Thousands of people will be heartened by this result.

Every day, 20 people in the UK are suffering unbearable pain at the end of their lives despite receiving the best possible care. For them, the choices are stark and harrowing: travel to Switzerland, and end their life by suicide, stop eating or drinking, or face and agonising natural death.

These people deserve better. They deserve the dignity of choice at the end of their lives, and we are relieved to see MPs acknowledge this. We are glad that MPs listened to the public and the evidence, and we hope this Bill will pass its subsequent stages through further respectful and essential debate.

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer voted in favour of the assisted dying legislation, parliamentary voting data has shown.

Earlier, a Downing Street spokesman said his position would not be made public as he did not want to influence MPs in later voting stages.

With the Bill passing the first stage in the Commons, it will go to committee stage where MPs can table amendments, before facing further scrutiny and votes in both the House of Commons and the House of Lords.

It means any changes to the proposed law would not be agreed until next year at the earliest.

Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, who introduced the Bill to Parliament, has said it would likely be a further two years from then for an assisted dying service to be in place.

MPs today voted in favour of assisted dying laws as historic legislation cleared its first hurdle in the House of Commons following five hours of emotionally-charged debate.

The Commons approved the second reading of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill by 330 votes to 275, majority 55, to continue its progress through Parliament.

If it completes its passage into law, the Bill will allow terminally ill, mentally competent adults to seek an assisted death in England and Wales with the approval of two doctors and a High Court judge.

Watch the historic moment below:

• Read the full story by our political correspondent Greg Heffer here

A proposed law to legalise assisted dying in England and Wales has cleared its first parliamentary hurdle after MPs voted 330 to 275, majority 55, to approve it at second reading.

MPs also approved a motion to allow the committee considering the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill to have the power to send for people, papers and records as part of its sessions.

MPs have now finished debating the Assisted Dying Bill and are now voting on whether to support the proposed legislation at second reading.

We’re expecting the result in the next 15 minutes.

Stick with us as we bring you the latest developments from the Commons.

Conservative MP Dr Neil Shastri-Hurst (Solihull West and Shirley) told the Commons he felt like he had ‘failed’ his patients, because he could not give them a ‘good death’.

The former surgeon said:

I failed because I did not give them the good death that they deserve despite the very best efforts of palliative care.

Labour and Conservative MPs who are both GPs have become the latest to support assisted dying legislation during a debate in Parliament.

Dr Simon Opher, the Labour MP for Stroud, suggested assisted dying can become a ‘tool’ in palliative care, while Dr Luke Evans said he wanted his death to be free from pain and peaceful.

Dr Opher said:

I totally support what everyone’s saying about really developing palliative care is really important, but that does not go instead of assisted dying. The things go together: assisted dying is one of our tools in palliative care as I see it.

Dr Evans added:

How do you picture your own death? It’s a question we rarely ask ourselves but one every one of us will face, and for me, I hope it’s with peace, surrounded by loved ones, free from pain, content with a life well lived.

He said of some conditions for which there is no way to ease pain or the risk of a sudden deterioration: ‘Should we not even offer those suffering at least the chance of dignity in their death? And this is what the Bill stands for.’

Small parties should get representation on the committee which will scrutinise the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, if MPs back it during Friday’s second reading, Liz Saville-Roberts has said.

Plaid Cymru’s Westminster leader told the House:

Death as an institutional convenience has never been and never will be right. It is our duty to demand good palliative care to address the institutional barriers, the resource barriers to good palliative care, but this is not a licence to sidestep today’s moral question.

Ms Saville-Roberts, the MP for Dwyfor Meirionnydd in Wales, said he would support the Bill at second reading if there ‘is a guarantee of sufficient scrutiny’ and if Parliament can ensure cross-party and small party representation on the Bill committee.

She added:

The implications for Wales where health is of course devolved cry out for proper consideration.

Labour MP Florence Eshalomi’s voice cracked with emotion as she told MPs of her own mother’s experience of sickle cell anaemia.

The Vauxhall and Camberwell Green MP said she ‘cannot support the proposals as it stands’ and added:

We must recognise the hard truth that health inequalities are wide and persistent. We know that black and minority ethnic disabled people have far worse health outcomes than the national average. I’ve seen this first-hand, caring for my mother who suffered with sickle cell anaemia.

As a teenager, I would be by her side when she was in excruciating pain, explaining to a doctor who would not believe her when she told them she needed lifesaving medication, and sadly this is still the reality today.

Ms Eshalomi then told the Commons about Evan Smith who died in 2019 at North Middlesex Hospital also from sickle cell anaemia.

He was in so much pain that he had to ring 999 from his hospital bed because he was denied oxygen and basic care by the doctors.

Put simply: we should be helping people to live comfortable, pain-free lives on their own terms before we think about making it easier for them to die.

*warning – this post contains distressing details*

Labour MP Lizzi Collinge (Morecambe and Lunesdale) told the Commons one of her relatives starved themselves to death as she spoke in favour of the bill.

Patients, doctors and indeed High Court judges are already making life and death decisions every day… in this case we’re actually talking about death or death decisions.

Ms Collinge highlighted an example of withdrawal of treatment, saying:

One of my close family members, who actually would not be covered by the eligibility criteria within this Bill, starved herself to death through withdrawal of treatment.

She had been unwell for many decades with a condition that would have eventually killed her, at one point becoming unable to swallow.

Ms Collinge said there came a point when her family member decided ‘enough was enough’, adding:

As a mentally competent adult under the current law she was able to take that decision.

She said the Bill and the ‘safeguards it puts in place’ give a ‘stronger framework of protection than the existing law’.

These pictures show the protests against the assisted dying bill outside Parliament as MPs debate the proposed legislation inside the Commons.

We’ve also seen demonstrations in support of the bill.

Robert Jenrick, the shadow justice secretary and runner-up in the Conservative leadership contest, is also voting against the bill over fears ‘activist judges’ in Strasbourg could change the legislation if it was approved.

He told MPs:

Bad law on trivial things is bad enough, and I’ve seen a lot of that in my time in this House, but bad law on matters of life and death is unforgivable.

Mr Jenrick added:

Let’s think about the role of judges. The test which is to be applied is a low one, it’s the civil law threshold, this is a balance of probabilities. This means a judge could see real risk of coercion and still sign-off this individual for assisted death; if the threshold was not reached of 50% or more, the judge would sign-off the individual.

The Newark MP, speaking from the backbenches but who also serves as shadow justice secretary, said:

I worry, in fact I am as certain as night follows day, this law if passed will change. Not as a result of the individuals in this chamber or in the Lords, but as a result of judges in other places.

We’ve seen that time and again. It may be on either side of the debate but it will happen. This Act, if passed, will be subject to activist judges in Strasbourg. They will change it fundamentally and we have to be prepared for that. I don’t want to see that happen.

A Labour MP has declared she is voting against the bill because of the ‘potential for abuse and coercion’ if assisted dying were legalised.

Jess Asato (Lowestoft) spoke about the difficulty of spotting the signs of coercive and controlling behaviour, adding she feared judges and medical professionals do not have the required training to see them.

She said she came to the decide no legislation can ‘adequately sift’ those with a genuine desire to end their own lives with those doing it for the wrong reason.

Conservative former minister Sir John Hayes told the Commons he will vote against the Bill.

This Bill changes the relationship between clinicians and patients forever. It says to the NHS, your job is not only protect and preserve life, it is sometimes to take life. I am not prepared for our NHS to be changed in that way, and beyond that it changes society’s view of what life and death is all about.

There are many cruel and spiteful and ruthless and unkind people in the world and there are many vulnerable and frail people, and when those two collide, it’s not a good outcome for the second of those groups.

Conservative MP Alicia Kearns has said it is ‘wrong’ not to give those with six months to live a choice, as she spoke about her mother’s experience of cancer.

The West Rutland MP told the Commons:

Imagine a situation where you have cancer that day by day is breaking every individual vertebrae on your body, one by one. There is nothing that can take away the pain, and that is a situation in which my mother lost her life, her last words were ‘I cannot go on like this’.

And thankfully for her, there were only a few more days of pain. But for others, there are months, and before they get to that six months, they will have suffered from years of excruciating agony that palliative care cannot resolve.”

To deny choice to others, especially those with only six months to live, where their personal choice does no harm, is wrong.

This is the moment Dame Meg Hillier became very emotional as she spoke about her daughter during the debate on assisted dying.

She spoke about her daughter who was admitted to hospital as a teenager with acute pancreatitis which left her unsure whether she would live or die.

Dame Meg urged any MPs with ‘scintilla of doubt’ about the Bill to vote against it as she insisted the failure of palliative care was not a reason to support it.

Watch her intervention below:

A Labour MP who has lived with a disability all her life said she would support the assisted dying Bill, but described the decision as ‘one of the hardest that I have had to make’.

Marie Tidball (Penistone and Stocksbridge) told the Commons:

Today’s decision has been one of the hardest that I have had to make. In my career in disability law and policy I chose not to focus on debates about whether disabled people should be born, or whether we should die.

Instead I focused on enabling disabled people to live better more fulfilling lives. Today I find myself voting in a way that I thought I never would, I will be voting in favour of moving the Bill to the next stage of the legislative process.

Sharing her personal experience, Ms Tidball said:

When I was six years old I had major surgery on my hips. I was in body plaster from my chest to my ankles, in so much pain and requiring so much morphine that my skin began to itch. I remember vividly laying in a hospital bed in Sheffield Children’s Hospital and saying to my parents ‘I want to die, please let me die’.

I needed to escape from that body that I was inhabiting. That moment has come back to me all these years later. That moment made it clear to me that if the Bill was about intolerable suffering I would not be voting for it.

Downing Street declined to say how Sir Keir Starmer will vote on assisted dying legislation but said he is paying close attention to the debate in the Commons.

‘He’s obviously paying extremely close attention to the debate. Ministers must be able to vote according to their conscience,’ the Prime Minister’s deputy spokesman said.

People across the country will be paying extremely close attention to today’s vote, but this is a matter of conscience.

It is for Parliament to decide changes to the law, and the Prime Minister is on record as saying he’s not going to say or do anything that will put pressure on other people in relation to their vote.

Every MP will have to make his or her mind up and decide what they want to do when that vote comes.

Conservative grandee Sir David Davis revealed he would be backing the assisted dying Bill at its second reading, but urged the Government to give MPs more time to debate it in future.

Sir David said he had changed his mind on assisted dying, describing himself as a believer in the ‘sanctity of life’ but also in freedom from torture and misery, and confirmed he would support its continuation through Parliament.

But he told the Commons he would only continue to support it at its later stages if it was given more time.

In a direct message to Labour ministers, he said:

This Bill is more important than most of the Bills in your manifesto.

More people care about this than they care about most other things we are doing, so it deserves four days in report stage in Government time over the course of several weeks. We don’t need a Royal Commission, this House can do this, but it needs to be given the option to do it.

So I say to the Government the path of responsibility is give us the time to get this right, and if we get it right it will be one of the things we will be proudest of in the coming years until we eventually leave this place.

Former Liberal Democrat leader Tim Farron has told MPs his opposition to the assisted dying bill is ‘grounded in compassion’.

The MP for Westmorland and Lonsdale warned MPs that “neither side has a monopoly on compassion”.

He told the Commons:

I personally will always be affected by watching my mum suffer at her death at the age I am now.

Mr Farron later warned of “self-coercion” and said:

My opposition to this Bill is grounded in compassion. To legalise assisted dying is to create the space for coercion that will undoubtedly see people die who would not otherwise have chosen to do so.

There are no safeguards in this Bill that will prevent this, indeed, to be fair, none would be possible even if we weren’t going through this hasty process.

Father of the House Sir Edward Leigh said he fears putting money into the NHS ‘to fund death’.

Sir Edward, the Conservative MP for Gainsborough, told the Commons:

Yes, we have to fund our hospice movement seriously. It is very worrying that we’re going to fund the NHS to fund death, but we’re not adequately funding our hospice movement.

What sort of society are we? Are we a society that loves our NHS, that loves life, that loves caring, that loves the hospice movement? Or are we a society which believes that there is despair? So, I will be voting for hope at 2.30pm and I will be voting against this Bill.

Labour MP Dr Peter Prinsley has told the Commons he believes the assisted dying bill is the ‘right change’ after once considering it as ‘unconscionable’.

I have seen uncontrollable pain. I’m speaking here of people who are dying, not of people living well with chronic or terminal diseases. We are talking about people at the end of their lives, wishing to choose the time and place to die.

Dr Prinsley later adds the legislation is ‘not a slippery slope’.

We are shortening death, not life for patients. This is not life or death, this is death or death.

Coercion and manipulation have been spoken about and are no doubt feared, but I think the danger of no change to the law is a greater fear for those who are dying and wish to have choice.

Conservative MP Ben Spencer, a consultant psychiatrist, urged MPs to vote against the Bill as he warned it places ‘implicit pressure’ on vulnerable people.

The MP for Runnymede and Weybridge said there was ‘limited ability’ to scrutinise the Bill, adding:

Many MPs support the principle of assisted dying but have concerns over implementation, resource implications and safeguarding – which is why I, along with other colleagues on both sides of the House, tabled a reasoned amendment to this Bill calling for an independent review and consultation before a vote in Parliament to provide a third way through.

Dr Spencer later said the Bill ‘does not protect’ people who are vulnerable to coercion or struggling with the burden of caring responsibilities, saying:

It risks placing implicit pressure on people already vulnerable at a time of life when they should be receiving our unwavering care and support. We should and must vote it down.

Labour MP Dame Meg Hillier wiped away tears as she spoke of her daughter’s admission to hospital with acute pancreatitis and how ‘good medicine’ can relieve the pain.

Former minister Dame Meg, MP for Hackney South and Shoreditch, told the Commons:

The principle at stake is that we do cross a Rubicon whereby somebody who is terminally ill by the definition of this Bill is assisted by the state to die. This is a fundamental change in the relationship between the state and the citizen, and the patient and their doctor.

If we have a scintilla of doubt about allowing the state that power, we should vote against this today.

Dame Meg said a ‘failure in palliative care and support is not a reason to continue’ with the Bill, adding about her daughter:

She was admitted to hospital with acute pancreatitis as a teenager so this Bill would not have covered her at that point, but I did not know for five days, in fact many months, whether she would live or die.

Those first five days she did not sleep and she was crying out in pain. But I saw what good medicine can do that palliated that pain, that got her to a place where although for two-and-a-half months she was unable to eat, she was saved and the key was she was not in pain – well, she was in pain but it was managed.

Health Secretary Wes Streeting has been challenged to ‘put firm commitments on palliative care on the table’ during the debate on assisted dying.

Liberal Democrat MP Layla Moran told the Commons:

I think this debate around palliative care needs to be had, my concern is that we have not had any firm commitments from Government other than woolly words about how they are actually going to tackle this. My concern is that a Royal Commission pushes this into the long grass.

And I say to the Secretary of State, who is in his place, the gauntlet has been thrown down. If he wants someone like me to not vote for this Bill moving forwards, I would say to him, he needs to do two things: one is put firm commitments on palliative care on the table that resolve them within the next, like one or two years, but then also commit to afterwards, bringing a bill like this back in Government time. Without those firm commitments, I will continue to make the case for continuing to want to see progress.

Conservative former minister James Cleverly questioned why the Bill is not being extended to children if it is a positive’.

Intervening in a speech by Lib Dem’s Layla Moran, Mr Cleverly said:

She’s misrepresenting what we are doing at this point with this Bill. We are speaking about the specifics of this Bill, this is not a general debate, this is not a theoretical discussion – it is about the specifics of the Bill.

If this is such a good thing to alleviate pain and suffering, a right that we should be proud to pass, why are we denying it to children? If it is a positive, why are we denying it to children?

Chairwoman of the health and social care committee Ms Moran replied:

I would simply say that might be something he might want to put in Bill committee at later stages. But it is important that members appreciate they can vote ‘yes’ today, and vote ‘no’ later.

Here’s video of Diane Abbott explaining why she won’t support the assisted dying bill in Parliament this afternoon.

The veteran Labour MP suggested there is a ‘better Bill’ on assisted dying which could come forward in the future, as she said she ‘cannot vote for a Bill’ with doubts about the safeguards within it.

Watch the footage below:

Liberal Democrat MP Layla Moran told the Commons she will be voting for the Bill ‘because I want this conversation to continue’.

The chairwoman of the health and social care committee said:

To those MPs who might be minded to vote for it on principle but are worried about the details, about how we might change a word here, or the role of clinicians or MPs, or whatever it may be, may I urge them to reconsider the question they’re asking themselves today.

This is the second reading, the media is asking all of us: ‘are you for or against this Bill?’ I would urge you to think of this question differently. The question I think we, and I, will be answering today is, ‘do I want to keep talking about the issues in this Bill’?

Do I want to keep grappling with the detail until I get to third reading, where I might reserve the right to at that point vote no? You can decide the question for yourself.

The assisted dying Bill is the ‘wrong and rushed answer to a complex problem’, Labour MP Rachael Maskell said.

She told the Commons:

The Bill falls woefully short on safeguarding patients, too flawed to amend. It’s the wrong and rushed answer to a complex problem.

The MP for York Central said coercion is her ‘greatest concern’, adding:

While we recognise coercion in relationships or elder abuse in dying – where there is malign intent – this Bill fails to safeguard.

Ms Maskell also raised concerns about the Bill’s impact on disabled people, she said:

We fight in this House to take stigma, give dignity, equality and worth, it is why disabled people fear this Bill. It devalues them in a society where they fight to live.

If you stand for equality, you will recognise the safeguarding failures in this Bill.

Mr Malthouse warns MPs planning to vote against the assisted dying they are making a ‘passive choice’

He says no matter which way the vote falls this afternoon, terminally ill people will continue to take their own lives, all they are deciding is how.

Watch his speech in the Commons:

Terminally ill people stuck in hospital might consider it their ‘patriotic duty’ to take advantage of assisted dying to free up beds in the event of another pandemic, MPs heard.

Jonathan Davies, Labour MP for Mid Derbyshire, said in an intervention:

I worry that if we were to see another pandemic on the scale of what we saw in 2020 whether people might think they were doing something patriotic by getting out of the way, by freeing up a bed for a young person.

Kit Malthouse argued against suggestions that adding to the burden of the NHS and the courts was a reason to vote against the Bill.

The Conservative former minister, who backs the assisted dying Bill, told the Commons:

These people are already dying. They are already in the national health service, they already are entitled to care. Even if you think there is an impact, are you seriously telling me that my death, my agony, is too much for the NHS to have time for? Is too much hassle?

Or even the claim that it would overload the judges. That I should drown in my own faecal vomit because it is too much hassle for the judges to deal with? We send things to the NHS and the judges from this House all the time. Is anyone suggesting that we shouldn’t be creating a new offence of spiking because the judges are overworked – which has come through this week? Of course not.

They will cope as they have done with all sorts of things that we have sent from this house over the years and we should not countenance the idea that some logistical problem is going to get in the way of giving us a good death to our fellow citizens.

Former Conservative cabinet minister Andrew Mitchell has told the Commons he has changed his mind on assisted dying after speaking to his constituents with tears ‘pouring down my face’.

Mr Mitchell, an ex-Foreign Office minister, said he believes MPs should give people the choice over when they want to die, adding he wants it for his family and ‘perhaps, one day, for myself’.

He added the current law meant people were planning their deaths ‘in secret’.

Watch his intervention below:

This is the moment groans broke out in the Commons after a Tory MP claimed specialist assisted death doctors in other countries ‘personally kill hundreds of patients a year’.

Danny Kruger told MPs: Medics I met in Canada, specialists in assisted death who personally kill hundreds of patients a year in their special clinics…’

Amid protests from MPs, he responded: ‘Well if members have a difficulty with the language then I wonder what they are doing here? This is what we are talking about.’

Watch the moment here:

High Court judges’ involvement in assisted dying ‘could just be a rubber stamp’, Mother of the House Diane Abbott has warned.

The long-serving Labour MP for Hackney North and Stoke Newington said:

I would recall to the House that in 1969, Parliament voted to abolish the death penalty for murder. Public opinion was actually against it but MPs believed on a point of principle that the state should not be involved in taking a life.

It was a good principle in 1969 and it remains a good principle today. I am not against legalising assisted dying in any circumstance but I have many reservations about this Bill and in particular, I do not believe that the safeguards are sufficient.

They are supposed to be the strongest in the world because of the involvement of a High Court judge, but the divisional court have said the intervention of a court would simply interpose an expensive and time consuming forensic procedure.

Ms Abbott later added:

Is a judge supposed to second-guess doctors? Will the judge make a decision on the basis of paperwork? Or will there be a hearing in open court? And where will be the capacity in the criminal justice system to deal with all this?

So far from being a genuine safeguard, the involvement of a judge could just be a rubber stamp.

Mr Kruger has ended his speech by claiming the option of assisted dying will ‘change life and death for everyone’.

On the issue of choice, Mr Kruger said:

With this new option and the comparative loss of investment and innovation in palliative care, real choice narrows.

He added in the Commons:

No man or woman is an island, and just as every person’s death, even a good death, diminishes us all, so we will all be involved and affected if we make this change.

The Bill will not just create a new option for a few and leave everyone else unaffected, it will impose on every person towards the end of their life, on everyone who could be thought to be near death – and on their family – this new reality, the option of assisted suicide, the obligation to have the conversation around the bedside, in whispers in the corridor, ‘Is it time?’ and it will change life and death for everyone.

Mr Kruger has argued that “almost anybody with a serious illness or disability” could fit the definition of terminally ill under the Bill.

The fact is that almost anybody with a serious illness or disability could fit this definition, and I recognise that these are not the cases (Kim Leadbeater) has in mind for this Bill, of course they’re not, but that’s the problem with the Bill.

Because all you need to do to qualify for an assisted death, the definition of terminal illness under this Bill, is to refuse treatment – like insulin if you’re diabetic.

In the case of eating disorders you just need to refuse food and the evidence is, in jurisdictions around the world and in our own jurisprudence, that would be enough to qualify you for an assisted death.

This is the moment Labour MP Kim Leadbeater told MPs her bill did not constitute a ‘choice between life and death’.

Putting forward her bill earlier today, she said: ‘the right to choose does not take away the right not to choose’.

Ms Leadbeater insisted her proposed legislation has overwhelming public support.

Watch part of her speech below:

Mr Kruger has argued that doctors and palliative care professionals are ‘in a great majority opposed to a change in the law’.

He told the Commons:

There is very clear evidence that doctors who work with the dying and the palliative care professionals are in a great majority opposed to a change in the law, both because they see the damage that it will do to the palliative care profession and services but also because of the dangers that they see to vulnerable patients.

The assisted dying Bill is ‘too big’ and ‘too flawed’ for MPs to make meaningful changes to it, the Commons heard.

Conservative MP Danny Kruger told MPs:

This Bill is simply too big for the time that it has been given. I implore members not to hide behind the fiction that it can be amended substantially in committee and it the remaining stages.

He later added:

The point about process though is this Bill is too flawed, there is too much to do with it to address in the committee stage.

East Wiltshire MP Mr Kruger earlier said:

My view is that if we get our broken palliative care system right and our wonderful hospices properly funded we can do so much more for all the people that we will hear about today, using modern pain relief and therapies to help everybody die with a minimum of suffering when the time comes.

But we won’t be able to do that if we introduce this new option. Instead we will expose many more people to harm.

Hundreds of protesters gathered outside Parliament on Friday calling on MPs to vote for Kim Leadbeater’s private members’ bill to legalise assisted dying.

At Parliament Square, just around the corner from a demonstration against the Bill, protesters dressed in pink held signs asking MPs to ‘vote for dignity’.

One held a sign saying ‘my life, my death, my choice’.

Speaking from the protest, Ally Thomson, director of communications at campaign group Dignity in Dying, said:

It’s not a law for people who are making a choice between living and dying, that choice has been made already for them.

They’re having a choice between two kinds of deaths. We know that the majority of the British public are very much in favour of Kim’s Bill.

Voting against the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill on Friday will mean ‘the end of the conversation once again for another 10 years’, a Labour backbencher has said.

Chesterfield MP Toby Perkins said during an intervention:

A decade ago, I voted against this Bill. I felt maybe it’s not perfect, maybe there’s more things that I need to know.

And she’s absolutely right, we haven’t talked about death again for 10 years. We’ve never considered this legislation. The truth is if we vote against her Bill today, it will be the end of the conversation once again for another decade.

Kim Leadbeater, the Labour MP who put forward the Bill, replied:

He’s absolutely right, and how many people will go through the situations I have described if it’s another 10 years before we address this matter?

Ms Leadbeater has now concluded her opening speech to open the floor to the chamber.

Conservative MP Danny Kruger is now outlining his opposition to the bill and has been granted 15 minutes to speak.

Former Labour minister Barry Gardiner has raised fears some terminally ill people may feel assisted dying is something they ‘ought’ to take up if the bill becomes law.

Intervening in the speech by his Labour colleague Kim Leadbeater, Mr Gardiner told the Commons:

My concern is that she has focused today on the individual and the individual choice. But we are here to legislate for society as a whole and in legislating, what we are saying if we pass this Bill is that this is OK to take that choice.

He continued:

And there will be some people who are in that situation with six months of their life to go who actually will then feel ‘ought I to do this? Is this something that I now should do?’

And it brings into play a whole set of considerations which are about ‘is it better for my family? Is it financially better for my family?’ in ways that at the moment are out of scope. So I think rather than simply focusing on the individual suffering, which we all recognise is acute, we must actually broaden it out to the impact this legislation will have on society as a whole?

Ms Leadbeater replied:

What I would suggest is that actually, this Bill will give society a much better approach towards end of life. We’re already seeing conversations about dying and death in a way that we haven’t seen, I don’t think, enough in this country. We have to take a holistic-er view.

Labour MP Kim Leadbeater has insisted her bill to legalise assisted dying contains the ‘strongest set of safeguards and protections in the world’.

She has repeatedly stated the legislation does not apply to people with mental health conditions, disabled persons or the elderly – unless they have a terminal illness.

She told MPs:

There are very strict eligibility criteria and multiple layers of checks and safeguards embedded in the Bill – none of which exist at the moment, as we have seen.

I made a very conscious decision to name the Bill Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life)’ rather than anything else. That title can never be changed and it ensures it is only adults who are dying that would ever come within its scope.

As such, this Bill is not about people who are choosing between life and death, it is about giving dying people who have got six months or less to live autonomy about how they die and the choice to shorten their death.

Labour MP Kim Leadbeater said people can have an assisted death if they travel to another country, adding the current legal position makes them feel like ‘criminals’.

She told MPs:

Because of the current legal position in this country, it is often a deeply distressing and very lonely experience, shrouded in secrecy, with people feeling like criminals as the fear of prosecution hangs over them.

Ms Leadbeater said it is estimated that more than 600 terminally ill people take their own lives every year, as she raised the experience of former Labour MP Paul Blomfield whose father Harry took his own life in 2014.

She told the Commons:

Harry wasn’t suicidal, he loved life, but he had watched too many of his friends have lingering, degrading deaths and he did not want that for himself. But, like the others, he couldn’t tell Paul and his family of his plan as they would have been complicit and could face prosecution.

And how many precious days and weeks did Harry miss out on as a result of having to take action while he was still able to physically do so?

*warning – this post contains distressing details*

A Labour MP supporting the assisted dying bill has told the Commons how one of her constituents watched her mother starve to death after suffering with pancreatic cancer, claiming it was ‘no way to see a loved one die’.

Lorraine Beavers (Blackpool North and Fleetwood) said:

A constituent of mine watched her mum suffer from pancreatic cancer, unable to keep any food down, she basically starved to death.

Does (Ms Leadbeater) agree with me that this is no way to see a loved one die? Does she also feel that we did not come in to this place to shy away from difficult choices, but to listen to our constituents and to make better laws for everyone?

Ms Leadbeater replied:

We all have stories from all our constituencies, and she’s absolutely right, we are here to make difficult decisions, but in terms of the example that she gives, I have been astonished by the number of people who have been in touch with me to tell me about their terminally ill loved ones who have starved themselves to death out of desperation.

The Labour MP pushing assisted dying legislation has told the House of Commons the British public wants ‘a change in the law’ as she opened today’s historic debate.

Kim Leadbeater told fellow MPs that her Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill will give people ‘choice, autonomy and dignity at the end of their lives’.

The Commons this morning began a scheduled five hours of debate before they vote this afternoon – around 2.30pm – on whether to proceed with Ms Leadbeater’s proposed legislation.

It will be the first time MPs have voted on the issue of assisted dying since 2015. MPs of all parties have been given a ‘free vote’ and the Government has taken a neutral stance on the Bill.

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer could vote in favour of the Bill – having backed a law change in 2015 – but Tory leader Kemi Badenoch will oppose the legislation after claiming it had been ‘rushed’.

• Read the story by our political correspondent Greg Heffer here

Conservative MP Mark Pritchard said the assisted dying Bill crosses an ‘irreversible medical red line for doctors and for nurses’.

Intervening, the MP for The Wrekin said:

Is it not the case that this crosses a new medical irreversible medical red line for doctors and for nurses?

And is it not the case that in other Bills that we’ve seen in this House over the years, that the safeguards invariably over time become obsolete, so the safeguards in this Bill, however well meant should be seen as temporary safeguards not immutable safeguards?

Wacth the moment below:

Kim Leadbeater told MPs the assisted dying bill being debated was ‘nothing like’ the laws in Canada and Belgium because while it strived for a similar purpose, it had greater safeguards.

DUP MP Jim Shannon (Shannon) intervened to claim the situation in Belgium had ‘deteriorated’ to include dementia and under 18s.

What guarantees have we that this legislation today will not end up as it will in Belgium, in which case ‘anything goes’? Is that what she really wants? I don’t want it, does she?

Ms Leadbeater replied:

Let’s be very clear. A huge amount of research has been done by the Health and Social Care Select Committee and indeed by myself and others.

The model that is being proposed here is nothing like happens in Belgium, it is nothing like happens in Canada. It is strict, stringent criteria, and if the House chooses to pass this Bill, that criteria cannot be changed.

Conservative former minister Simon Hoare has raised fears doctors will be unable to check for coercion in assisted dying requests.

Intervening in Kim Leadbeater’s speech to introduce the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, Mr Hoare said:

She references coercion and I recognise the point that she makes about the two medics, but the medics won’t be able to see or have heard anything and everything at all times.

People will not be put beyond challenge because subsequent to the death, if a relative claims coercion of another relative, investigation will remain.

Ms Leadbeater, the Labour MP for Spen Valley, replied:

We’re going to check for coercion in a very robust system. We don’t have any of that now, so at the moment the person will definitely be dead.

We have to look at the status quo by putting layers of safeguarding and checking for coercion. That’s got to be better than the system that we’ve got now.

Labour MP Kim Leadbeater has recounted stories from members of the public to emphasise why the legislation is needed.

She told MPs about a former police officer who felt he could not visit the Swiss Dignitas clinic with his mother.

The MP for Spen Valley told the Commons:

Former police officer James waved his mum off as she embarked on her final trip to Dignitas. She had terminal vasculitis.

James desperately wanted to accompany his mum and hold her hand during her final moments, but he knew because of his job as a police officer it was just not possible – indeed, she insisted he must not go with her. So she went alone. No one to hold her hand, no proper goodbye or funeral.

She said it was one of many examples of the ‘heartbreaking reality and human suffering’ people are experiencing as a result of the status quo

Ms Leadbeater later added:

Let’s be clear, we are not talking about a choice between life or death, we are talking about giving dying people a choice of how to die.

Labour MP Kim Leadbeater said the assisted dying Bill will give people ‘choice, autonomy and dignity’ as she opened the debate in the Commons.

The MP for Spen Valley told MPs:

It is a privilege to open the debate on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill – a piece of legislation which would give dying people – under very stringent criteria – choice, autonomy and dignity at the end of their lives.

She added:

And let me say to colleagues across the house – particularly new colleagues – I know that this is not easy. It certainly hasn’t been easy for me. But if any of us wanted an easy life I’m afraid we are in the wrong place. It is our job to address complex issues and make difficult decisions. And I know for many people this is a very difficult decision.

But our job is also to address the issues that matter to people, and after nearly a decade since this hugely important subject was debated on the floor of the house, many would say this debate is long overdue.

An amendment seeking to decline giving the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill a second reading has not been selected for consideration.

A group of six cross-party MPs put forward an amendment arguing a private members’ bill does not ‘allow for sufficient debate on and scrutiny of a Bill on a matter of this importance’.

But it was not chosen by Commons Speaker Lindsay Hoyle.

MPs now have until 2.30pm to debate the Bill.

If the debate concludes before the cut-off point, they can hold a vote on whether or not to approve the principle of the Bill and allow it undergo further scrutiny at a later date.

Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle said more than 160 MPs are bidding to speak in the assisted dying debate.

He advised backbenchers to speak for approximately eight minutes and added he could impose a formal time limit if required.

Sir Lindsay told the Commons:

At about 2pm I will call frontbenchers to make their comments and then we will move to end the debate.

I’ve got to manage the expectations – not everyone will get in. I will try and get in as many people as possible.

It is one of the most important debates this House has had so it’s about being considerate, respectful of each other and let us listen to each other. This is the time for the House to show itself at its best.

Here’s our live stream of today’s debate in Parliament as MPs speak for and against assisted dying.

The debate has now started in Parliament with Labour MP Kim Leadbeater speaking first.

Ms Leadbeater put forward the private members’ bill.

More than 100 MPs are expected to speak over the next five hours.

We will bring you the key developments from the Commons throughout the morning and afternoon.

Labour MP Kim Leadbeater said evidence from elsewhere in the world where it is legal suggests assisted deaths account for between 0.5 and 3% of deaths.

She said it is likely take-up would be in the hundreds, rather than thousands.

In terms of how the law is scrutinised, the chief medical officers in England and Wales and the Health Secretary would be required to monitor and report on the operation of the law.

The Health Secretary would also be required to report on the availability, quality and distribution of appropriate health services to people with palliative care needs, including pain and symptom management, psychological support for those people and their families, and information about palliative care and how to access it.

MPs will vote on whether to legalise assisted suicide in the UK today, with the result on a knife-edge.

Sir Keir Starmer’s Cabinet and all the major political parties are heavily divided on changing the law to allow medics to help the terminally ill end their lives without fear of prosecution.

They will vote on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, introduced by Labour’s Kim Leadbeater, this afternoon amid emotional campaigns run by those for and against the change.

More than 100 MPs are expected to try to speak during a debate starting this morning and expected to last five hours. But critics of the law change have suggested it is being forced through too quickly.

If approved, the Bill would allow terminally ill, mentally competent adults to seek an assisted death with the approval of two doctors and a High Court judge.

A disabled woman receiving end of life care has told the BBC the assisted dying bill could permanently erode the trust between doctors and patients.

Palliative care patient Nicki Myers, from Cambridge, was given five years to live in 2017 when she was diagnosed with a terminal illness but has outlived her predictions.

Speaking to BBC’s Newsnight she explained why she was concerned about the assisted dying bill.

Watch below:

Earlier we saw protesters against the new assisted dying law but here we have some supporters of the bill making their case in Parliament.

David Cameron has become the first former UK prime minister to give his backing to moves to legalise assisted dying for terminally-ill adults ahead of an emotionally charged vote tomorrow.

The Conservative former PM, who was ennobled as Lord Cameron by Rishi Sunak and served as his foreign secretary, had previously opposed moves to change the law.

But in an article for the Times newspaper, he said he had been won over to supporting in the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, set to be debated by MPs on Friday.

Former prime ministers Liz Truss, Boris Johnson, Baroness Theresa May and Gordon Brown have all said they are opposed to the Bill.

None of them will have a vote on Friday, but Baroness May and Lord Cameron would if the Bill reached the Lords.

• Read the full story here

The short answer is no.

Bills such as this are known as private members’ bills (PMBs) and are considered during Friday sittings. The time available to consider them is from 9.30am until 2.30pm.

If the debate is still ongoing at 2.30pm then it is adjourned and the Bill falls to the bottom of the list, which means it is highly unlikely to make any further progress.

A closure motion can be moved to curtail the debate and force a vote. It may be moved at any time during proceedings.

On Friday sittings, an MP seeking to move such a motion tends to do so at around 1pm. If approved, the House then votes on whether or not to give the Bill a second reading.

If rejected, the House resumes the debate and the Bill is unlikely to progress.

Protesters against assisted dying have arrived in Parliament as MPs prepare for five hours of debate this morning.

Doctors would not be under any obligation to take part in an assisted dying and the terminally-ill person must take the medication themselves.

It has been suggested it might be the case a person exercising their right to die might be able to take such medication by pushing a button.

Doctors who do would have to be satisfied the person making their declaration to die has made it voluntarily and not been coerced or pressured by anyone else.

They would also be required to ensure the person is making an informed choice, including being made aware of their other treatment options such as palliative and hospice care.

Doctors would not be under a duty to raise the option of assisted dying with a patient.

The Bill states that there is nothing to stop them ‘exercising their professional judgment to decide if, and when, it is appropriate to discuss the matter with a person’.

A new law has been proposed to legalise assisted dying in England and Wales.

Here, the PA news agency takes a look at the details of Kim Leadbeater’s Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill:

• Who would be eligible?

Only terminally adults who are expected to die within six months and who have been resident in England and Wales and registered with a GP for at least 12 months.

They must have the mental capacity to make a choice about the end of their life and be deemed to have expressed a clear, settled and informed wish – free from coercion or pressure – to end their life.

• How would the process work?

The terminally ill person must make two separate declarations, witnessed and signed, about their wish to die.

The process must involve two independent doctors being satisfied the person is eligible and the medics can consult a specialist in the person’s condition and get an assessment from an expert in mental capacity if deemed necessary. A High Court judge must hear from at least one of the doctors regarding the application and can also question the dying person as well as anyone else they consider appropriate.

• How long would it take?

There must be at least seven days between the two doctors making their assessments and a further 14 days after the judge has made a ruling, for the person to have a period of reflection on their decision.

For someone whose death is expected imminently, the 14-day period could be reduced to 48 hours.

• What safeguards are there?

It would be illegal for someone to pressure, coerce or use dishonesty to get someone to make a declaration that they wish to end their life or to induce someone to self-administer an approved substance.

If someone is found guilty of either of these actions, they could face a jail sentence of up to 14 years.

• How soon could an assisted dying service be running?

Ms Leadbeater has suggested an assisted dying service would not be up and running for around another two years from the point the law was passed, with “even more consultation to make sure we get it right” at that stage.

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer confirmed he would vote today, saying he has a ‘huge amount of interest’ in the issue, but he declined to specify on which side he would come down.

But it has been reported the Prime Minister has given his strongest signal yet he will back assisted dying in what would be a landmark vote today.

Yesterday, Starmer insisted the bill would be a ‘genuinely free vote’, adding he did not want to place any pressure on Labour MPs unsure about which way to vote.

In 2015, the last time Parliament debated assisted dying, Starmer voted in favour of it.

Asked whether his views had changed since then, he said: I’ve obviously got a huge amount of interest and experience in this, having looked at every single case for five years that was ever investigated. I will therefore be casting my vote tomorrow.

In previous role as director of public prosecutions before he entered politics, Starmer set out guidance on when relatives would be charged for assisting suicide which he said then had convinced him of the ‘injustice’ of the current legislation.

The answer to this question varies.

Research by the Policy Institute and the Complex Life and Death Decisions group at King’s College London (KCL) in September suggested almost two-thirds of just over 2,000 adults surveyed in England and Wales want assisted dying to be legalised for terminally ill adults in the next five years.

But it showed the changeable nature of some people’s views, with some of those voicing support saying they could change their minds if they felt someone had been pressured into choosing an assisted death or had made the choice due to lack of access to care.

Overall, the polling found a fifth (20%) of people said they do not want assisted dying to be legalised in the next five years, while 63% said they do.

Campaigners from Care Not Killing said this polling showed public support for what they term “assisted suicide” had lessened in the past decade and highlighted the statistics around those who are concerned about people feeling pressure to end their lives.

More recent polling from More in Common found 65% support the principle of assisted dying while 13% oppose it and the rest are unsure. Its polling of around 2,000 people across Great Britain this month also found that almost a third (30%) were unaware a debate on the issue was happening in Parliament.

Around a quarter of those polled said eligibility for assisted dying should be on the basis of life expectancy, which is the case with the current Bill, but 51% said people with terminal degenerative paralysing conditions should be eligible, something the current Bill does not propose.

Before we look ahead to today’s proceedings, let’s take a look at what assisted dying actually means and where the law stands on it at the moment.

Here are three key questions and answers to get you going:

• What is assisted dying?

This, and the language used, varies depending on who you ask.

Pro-change campaigners Dignity in Dying argue that, along with good care, dying people who are terminally ill and mentally competent adults deserve the choice to control the timing and manner of their death.

But the campaign group Care Not Killing uses the terms ‘assisted suicide’ and ‘euthanasia’, and argues that the focus should be on ‘promoting more and better palliative care’ rather than any law change.

They say legalising assisted dying could ‘place pressure on vulnerable people to end their lives for fear of being a financial, emotional or care burden upon others’ and argue the disabled, elderly, sick or depressed could be especially at risk.

• What is the current law?

Assisted suicide is banned in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, with a maximum prison sentence of 14 years.

In Scotland, it is not a specific criminal offence but assisting the death of someone can leave a person open to being charged with murder or other offences.

• What is happening at Westminster?

Labour MP Kim Leadbeater formally introduced her Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill to Parliament in October.

A debate and first vote are expected to take place on Friday.

If the Bill passes the first stage in the Commons, it will go to committee stage where MPs can table amendments, before facing further scrutiny and votes in both the House of Commons and the House of Lords, meaning any change in the law would not be agreed until next year at the earliest.

Ms Leadbeater’s Bill would apply only to England and Wales.

by Daily Mail Comment

The House of Commons votes on Friday on whether the State should give some of its citizens the right to kill themselves – and actively participate in their deaths.

The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill also sets out a legal and medical framework for when that right may be exercised, as well as the cold mechanics of how life would be extinguished.

There could hardly be a more profound moral issue, or a heavier responsibility on our elected representatives to examine every detail.

Yet this Bill was published only three weeks ago, and MPs are being allowed just five hours of debate before voting on it.

While that may be nothing unusual for a private members’ Bill, of which this is an example, is it really enough time to deal with a subject of such magnitude?

• Read the full comment piece here

by Sam Merriman, The Daily Mail’s social affairs correspondent

The vote on assisted dying was on a knife edge last night in the countdown to the crunch Commons debate.

While a majority of the MPs to publicly declare their position have come out in favour of introducing one of the most significant social changes in Britain’s history, the outcome still remains shrouded in uncertainty.

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer confirmed he would vote today, saying he has a ‘huge amount of interest’ in the issue, but he declined to specify on which side he would come down.

Meanwhile Kim Leadbeater, the Labour MP behind the proposed change to the law, spoke of being ‘emotionally ruined’ by weeks of campaigning and told how she can no longer walk down the street without somebody revealing a personal story.

After a five-hour debate today, MPs are expected to vote for the first time in almost a decade on whether to legalise assisted dying.

• Read the full story here

Good morning and welcome to MailOnline’s live coverage as MPs debate introducing assisted dying laws to England and Wales for the first time.

The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill would allow some terminally-ill people to choose when they can die if it is passed into law.

The proposed legislation has divided Parliament with many MPs declaring they will vote for and against, while a large number including Sir Keir Starmer have yet to state their intention.

Today we will hear five hours of debate followed by a possible vote on whether the bill will progress to the next reading at which point MPs can table amendments.

Join us as we bring you the latest updates and reactions from throughout the day.