Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

Baroness Taylor of Stevenage Excerpts

Committee stage
Friday 6th February 2026 Lords Chamber

Cooling-off periods are there for a reason: people change their minds and may need time to think and talk it over. In Oregon in 2023, 28% of assisted deaths took place in an expedited waiting period. The same problem could happen here. We therefore need to consider all the ramifications. My amendment is a probing one, but I do not think the Bill, as it stands, recognises the role of VSED. As it stands, we could have a situation where VSED is openly promoted by campaigners as a way to help ensure eligibility and to avoid a safeguard and get on to the fast track for an assisted death.

[Baroness in Waiting/Government Whip (Baroness Taylor of Stevenage) (Lab)]

My Lords, we have agreed noble Lords would benefit from a short lunch break. It is going to be some time before this group is finished, so this seems the most convenient point to take a break. Therefore, I beg to move the debate on this amendment be adjourned. Colleagues in attendance should make sure their name is registered at the Table for the continuation of the debate after lunch.

--- Later in debate ---

Amendment 121 not moved.

[Baroness in Waiting/Government Whip (Baroness Taylor of Stevenage) (Lab)]

My Lords, I beg to move that the House be now resumed.

[Lord Harper (Con)]

My Lords, before the Committee decides on that question, I put two points on the record. First, we are finishing slightly early. I make the point that some of us would have been perfectly happy to continue to six o’clock to make some more progress, so this is the Government’s decision. However, I understand that we had some confusion on the adjourned group. I flag to the Chief Whip that, when we have an adjourned group and we have a list, perhaps the list could be published in some way so that there is clarity before we start proceedings about who was and was not here at the beginning of the debate on the group. That would avoid the problem we had this morning.

The other issue is that, if we had started the group today, because of the lateness of the hour and the necessity for a significant number of Members to leave early because of travel arrangements to get home, a significant number of people who might have wished to contribute to the debate would not have been able to, even if we had adjourned and continued it next week. Given that the Government Chief Whip said that it was okay for Members to leave early because of those travel situations, can he give some thought to whether, if we start a group to make progress and then adjourn, those Members could still be able to participate in the debate on the group when we resume on the following occasion? I recognise that that is a variation in procedure, but it is about trying to work with the unusual circumstances we face to make sure that people can participate, but also making the best use of the time while complying with the House’s ruling that we make more time available to make progress on the Bill.

[Baroness Taylor of Stevenage (Lab)]

I shall refer the noble Lord’s comments to the usual channels.

House resumed.