Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

Lord Swire Excerpts

Friday 12th September 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Swire (Con)]

My Lords, I start, as others have, by thanking all those who have taken the trouble to write to me, raising some very personal stories, some very tragic. I have no personal stories myself, but I am very moved by those who have. It is one of the few debates in which I wish I was speaking much later on so I could sit and listen, as I seem to change my mind with every speaker and their own personal experience.

Here, we have a piece of legislation which raises profound ethical and moral issues. We therefore owe it to ourselves and the country to spend as much time on a deep dive into many of the issues they raise. It is the duty of this House to do that. I do not agree with what the noble Baroness, Lady Hodge, said, that in some way the Commons being elected means they have more rights than we do. We have absolutely every right to amend the Bill or send it back if we are not happy with what is in it.

The Bill, as currently construed, leaves me with an overriding nervousness. What happens next if we pass this legislation? The noble and learned Lord is reassuring on the matter of primary legislation being required were this to be amended in any way in the future. But the noble Baroness, Lady Murphy, is honest enough in saying that she would be seeking immediately an extension of eligibility. You can quite envisage how, in a few years’ time, people will say, “Things have changed and medical things have changed. Shouldn’t it be 12 months, and shouldn’t there be others who can come into this category? Shouldn’t we extend the category, as they have done in Cananda?”, with all the profound problems that have arisen in that part of the world. I am nervous about that.

I have a deep unease that we are going to be asking part of the NHS staff, full of dedicated people, who are working there, on the whole, because they wish to preserve and enhance life. We are hypothecating part of it to create a category of workers within the NHS who will be dedicated to ending life. That leaves me with a sense of profound unease. Surely, we should be spending more time, effort and money on palliative care, end-of-life care and social care. That should be where we are concentrating all our efforts and energies.

We have heard very little about the amazing advances that there are in treatment on an almost daily basis. What is inoperable or life-threatening today very often is curable tomorrow, or life can be extended tomorrow. I think we should be a little bit more positive about the ability for people to recover from illnesses which now, frankly, they would die from.

I am worried about the asymmetry of this legislation—that we will have different regulations, perhaps, in different parts of the United Kingdom. I am concerned by the report of the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee, which expressed its concern that so much of the Bill is being left to delegated legislation. I am concerned that the Select Committee on the Constitution is concerned about the lack of pre-legislative scrutiny, saying that

“deliberation, assessment and scrutiny is … significantly less than we would expect”

from a government Bill, which is why I completely support my noble friend Lord Forsyth of Drumlean’s amendment, because that makes complete sense.

I have not made my mind up finally and shall not do so until I have heard all the arguments at the end, but currently, if the vote were today, I would not be in a position to support the Bill.