Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

Baroness Blackstone Excerpts

Friday 20th March 2026 Lords Chamber

[Lord Goodman of Wycombe (Con)]

My Lords, my Amendment 765, supported by the noble Lord, Lord Rooker, would delete Clause 42(4). I will briefly read the subsection, as it is not very long:

“Regulations under subsection (3) may make any provision that … could be made by an Act of Parliament, and … would not be within the legislative competence of the Senedd if it were contained in an Act of the Senedd”.


I will not repeat the case put by the noble Baroness, Lady Finlay, who quoted the report of the Delegated Powers Committee, on which I sit, which argued that the clause is highly inappropriate. Rather than do that, I will put to the sponsor of the Bill a simple question, and I would be grateful if he addressed it when he winds up. I quote from the report of the committee:

“Delegated powers that can be used to do anything that an Act of Parliament can do are very rare, with the wording currently appearing in just two Acts: the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 and the European Union (Future Relationship) Act 2020”.


I was not on the committee when that report was produced, but my understanding is that the argument at the time was that the exigencies of Brexit required business to be done by regulation, rather than by an Act of Parliament. My question for the sponsor of the Bill is: what is the exigency in this case that requires the provision, which he believes needs to be made, to be made by regulation, which necessarily has to be dealt with on a “take it or leave it” basis, rather than by an Act of Parliament that Peers and Members of the other place can amend? I would be grateful if he could answer that question when he replies to the debate. If he cannot, I look forward to returning to this on Report, if we ever get there.

[Baroness Blackstone (Lab)]

My Lords, regrettably, we are never going to get to Report. Members of the House keep referring to Report. My noble and learned friend, the sponsor of the Bill, has frequently said that he will come back to some of the questions that have been put by the noble Lord, Lord Harper, and others. Normally, that would happen on Report. Were there a more disciplined and focused approach to scrutinising the Bill by those who oppose it, we would have perhaps got to Report, but we have not. We have had a long debate about Wales, including all sorts of questions about the devolutionary arrangements, and I wonder whether we can now hear from the Front Bench.

[Lord Goodman of Wycombe (Con)]

Would the noble Baroness perhaps like to make it clear whether she believes that it is inappropriate for the sponsor of the Bill to reply to the question I have just put in Committee?