Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

Lord Young of Norwood Green Excerpts

Friday 19th September 2025 Lords Chamber

[Lord Young of Norwood Green (Lab)]

My Lords, as somebody once said at this stage in the debate, “Everything that can be said has already been said”, and then added, “But not by everyone”. I am the everyone, if you like, but I hope I will add something of interest.

The noble Lord, Lord Deben, said that this has never been tried before and proved effective. Actually, it has, in Oregon and a number of other places. It is a matter of opinion: you have your opinion and I have mine. The overwhelming weight of correspondence that I received was in favour of the Bill and I am sure people did not single me out because they knew what I thought on this issue.

The other problem that has been drawn to our attention is that if we go down the road of this Bill, it will put an enormous strain on the NHS. I must admit that I do not understand that argument. Whether anybody opts for this or not, palliative care will have to be provided, and that is already being provided by us, so I do not really understand that.

We are then told that this Bill is not the right one. I have looked through it and it seems to me that this is a very carefully worded and structured Bill. It provides all the safeguards that we should want: preliminary discussion, first declaration, subsequent assessments—it goes on and on with safeguards. The Bill contains a number of safeguards to establish that, at various stages in the process, including at the time the approved substance is provided to the person for self-administration, the person

“has capacity to make the decision to end their life”,

they have

“a clear, settled and informed wish to end their own life”,

have

“made the decision that they wish to end their own life”,

and have a requested provision of assistance. I will not go on to read all of it, but there are more than enough safeguards in there.

I listened carefully, as one would, to some of the best legal brains that we have in this House. I listened carefully to the noble and learned Baroness, Lady Butler-Sloss, who said that it is badly drawn. With due respect to her, that is a matter of opinion. I do not think it is badly drawn. This is a carefully thought out, well-drawn Bill that has been developed over a significant period.

I say this to the House: what are the alternatives that present themselves to somebody in this situation? Are we really saying that we want people to make a choice to go to Switzerland to Dignitas, with the rest of their family feeling anxious, concerned and worried? I do not think that is the sort of choice that we should be inflicting on people.

I am in favour of scrutiny, and this House will do it. A Select Committee will look at it, but not in a way that will prevent the eventual progress of the Bill. I hope that the House will recognise that this is a good and fair Bill that gives people the right to choose at a very difficult time in their life, without coercion but with support and help.