Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

Debate between Baroness Fox of Buckley and Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town

Committee stage
Friday 24th April 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Fox of Buckley (Non-Afl)]

Such moral dilemmas hint at the fundamental shift in the raison d’être of medicine that is required. A systemic shift will be needed to change the NHS constitution and redefine “medical treatment”. So I am grateful to this House, whether or not it has taken 14 days, that we heard the noble Lord, Lord Stevens, warn that the Bill’s open-ended Clause 41 would be a Trojan horse clause for fundamental change to the NHS by the back door, yet amendments to it have been sneeringly described as trivial, overly cruel and absurd.

Having sat through hours—days, even—on the Employment Rights Bill in this place, I thought that it was my responsibility to look at this Bill’s impact on workers’ rights. When I asked about two-tier conscience clauses that could leave out junior staff and ancillary workers such as porters and care workers if there were no system-wide opt-in model, the noble and learned Lord, Lord Falconer, batted my worries away. However, since my speech on that topic, I have talked to people, including prison officers, care staff and even a real-life porter—they were all trade union members, by the way—who thanked me for raising it and said that they had changed their minds after the debate because it had made them understand and reconsider the Bill’s broader impact. It seems a credit to the Committee that it has allowed people outside this Chamber to think about lawmaking beyond soundbites and emotive headlines.

My final words are to comment on who we, the alleged filibusterers, are. No disrespect, but we are a bit of a ragbag and not an organised ideological collective. I am in awe of my temporary comrades in arms, who have treated this process with diligence and moral seriousness. It is lazy and insulting to hear people being discussed in the media so disparagingly, or the suggestion that all the amendments were some conspiratorial plot. That is cynical misinformation and an undignified smear. So when—probably—or if any version of assisted dying legislation returns here, I hope that all sides will continue to read the small print, line by line, and that we will stop smearing each other and maybe work together on bringing through safe and workable legislation, if we must have the legislation at all.

[Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town (Lab)]

My Lords—

Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

Debate between Baroness Fox of Buckley and Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town

Committee stage
Friday 20th March 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town (Lab)]

My Lords, I am pleased that the noble Lord who moved the amendment is in remission from his cancer. On other Bills we wish he was in remission from his political views, but on this one we celebrate with him.

I used to run a cancer charity, and the truth is that on this issue not everyone is using statistics. Doctors are often using their eyes; when we are talking about the last weeks it is their eyes, rather than going to any statistical table, that will tell them. There is an assumption that all this is going to be based statistically on the six-month period, but it is not like that. My own guess is that most people who are dying will probably start thinking about this only at three months. Tonight I am going to be dining with a recent widower. His wife—a very well-known author but it does not matter who she was—had cancer. She fought it, but fighting it is not enough. It was only really in the last weeks that she realised that what she wanted was help in those weeks. It was at that point that she tried to get to Switzerland, but by then it was too late.

My judgment is that much of this, for many of the patients who will be asking for this, will be very much towards the end. I will be surprised if at that point the doctor is going to their statistical tables, because at that stage the patient’s age and underlying health and other factors will contribute as much to assessing whether it is going to be days, weeks or maybe a month as the particular type of cancer that they have. This attempt to make that process overscientific is probably not right, and we should have faith, which some people in this House do not seem to have, in doctors.

[Baroness Fox of Buckley (Non-Afl)]

My Lords, it is hard to follow the noble Lords, Lord Moylan and Lord Carlile, whose contributions were made with such panache, wit and insight. What really intimidated me was the noble Lord, Lord Moylan, saying, “This amendment is all about understanding the mathematics”. I thought, “Oh God, I’ve put my name to it. There’s been a terrible error”. I bring absolutely no mathematical understanding to the question.

I put my name to the amendment on the requirement that medical practitioners should discuss underlying data on survival—in terms of the median prognosis of six months and how it is calculated and so on—because I am interested in ensuring that there is maximum transparency for patients under the Bill, so that any choice that they make is well informed. The Bill rightly requires that an applicant for assisted dying is informed, so it seems obvious that being informed should include an understanding of the context of the data and the reliability of a prognosis, which would help them to inform themselves.

Low-traffic Neighbourhoods

Debate between Baroness Fox of Buckley and Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town

Tuesday 21st November 2023 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Hayter of Kentish Town (Lab)]

My Lords—

[Baroness Fox of Buckley (Non-Afl)]

My Lords—