Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

Lord Markham Excerpts

Friday 5th December 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Ashcombe (Con)]

My Lords, I take noble Lords back to when they were young; we have all been there. I suspect that we all remember the odd and what may now seem very troubling ideas that sometimes passed through our minds during those years. Many of us have also watched our children—and for some of us, I dare say, grandchildren, though I am not there yet—navigate that turbulent stage of life. These formative years are full of experimentation, confusion and growth. They are not the years in which irreversible decisions should be entertained. Therefore, I am very much in favour of increasing the age limit to 25, as the noble Baroness, Lady Berger, suggests.

[Lord Markham (Con)]

My Lords, this has been a really good discussion showing the range of views and expert opinion that we have here. I think I heard from the noble and learned Lord, Lord Falconer, that he was willing to look at the age question. I think he said that he was more likely to add safeguards—

[Lord Rooker (Lab)]

The noble and learned Lord, Lord Falconer, specifically ruled out changing the age. He wanted to put qualifications on it; that was as far as he went.

[Lord Markham (Con)]

The point I was making—I am sure he will speak for himself in a moment—was that he was willing to look at that. He said that he was more likely to look at additional safeguards between 18 and 25. But I think he said—again, correct me if I am wrong—that he is willing to have further discussions with a lot of the experts we have here, including the noble Baronesses, Lady Cass and Lady Finlay, and, I am sure, others, to look at the whole question around age, as a product of the good debate that we have had here today.

I think I heard that the noble and learned Lord is taking on board the comments; he is willing to go away and look at this whole question with the experts here and, I hope, come back with something that reflects the reasonable view of everyone here today. I think we are being shown a way forward. I am keen to hear later about a lot of other things, such as the residency question and a lot of the other groupings, so at this point, I think we have what we are looking for—have we not?—in terms of a good discussion on this. I hope that we can go on to talk about some of the other groups.

[Lord Falconer of Thoroton (Lab)]

Just to clarify my position, I was responding to the debate which gave rise to real concerns about the age. I understood the noble Baronesses, Lady Cass and Lady Finlay, to say that perhaps a way forward would be to see whether there were additional safeguards from 18 to 25. That would involve me having a discussion with them and, if they were satisfied that there were additional safeguards and that they thought the age of 18 was right, that would obviously have an effect on me. If they put other arguments, I would obviously take them on board as well. My experience of the House is that, if one sees a way forward, before one continues making the same arguments as before, one sees whether a compromise that sensible Members of the House think would be enough works and whether it could attract support on Report. That was what I was thinking.