Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

Lord Birt Excerpts

Friday 12th September 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Birt (CB)]

My Lords, I strongly support this Bill. Overall, it is well considered. Importantly, it benefits from the experiences of many other countries that started this journey well before us. In no sense would we be pioneers.

The carefully designed process that the Bill sets out should address the possible risks—for instance, severe coercion—that have, reasonably, been identified. We know from surveys that there is overwhelming public support for assisted dying. All of us have received heart-rending letters pleading for the passage of this Bill from individuals who have had the harrowing experience of witnessing loved ones slowly dying in extreme pain or in utterly debilitating circumstances. This Bill confers the right for such an individual facing imminent death not just to avoid intense anguish and pain—as well as the prospect of their condition progressing intolerably—but to die at a moment of their choosing, in the circumstances of their choosing, and with dignity. I want that right, and anyone who wants it should have it, too.

No doubt the Bill can be improved further. The Delegated Powers Committee makes many persuasive points which we should take on board. However, the Explanatory Notes remind us of decades of attempts to introduce assisted dying legislation that have simply failed. It is highly unlikely that any Government in the foreseeable future will seize the baton. We must therefore make this Bill work, then pass it.

I have only one personal reservation, which I share with others, including the noble Lord, Lord Forsyth. Although I entirely see the value of a process setting out two independent medical assessments, two periods of reflection and an independent review panel, in a world of constrained resources where it is hard these days even to see your GP, there may be the risk of unwelcome slippage and a prolonged delay—perhaps in August or over the Christmas period—that intensifies suffering. Should we build into this process, on the one hand, greater certainty on the total time normally taken; or, on the other, some flexibility on telescoping time when circumstances demand it, particularly for those who may enter the process at a later stage?

Finally, I strongly advise anyone who is uncertain and harbouring doubts about the Bill to watch the one-hour discussion, hosted by the Healthcare Professionals for Assisted Dying, with four Australian practitioners working in this field. Without exception, they come across as people of enormous integrity and humanity, caring, truly dedicated to their work, and entirely convincing about the necessity and effectiveness of a carefully considered assisted dying process. It is well worth watching. I have no doubt whatever that our medical professionals who volunteer—and you have to volunteer—for a role in the assisted dying process will equally rise to the challenge.

Let us further improve, but then pass, this critically important Bill.