Exclusive
James Cleverly slams 'Orwellian' assisted dying bill as High Court judge sign-off to be scrapped
11 February 2025, 18:59
Watch Again: Andrew Marr speaks to former Home Sec James Cleverly | 11/02/25
James Cleverly has hit out at the assisted dying bill as 'Orwellian' after it emerged that the need for sign-off from a high-court judge could be axed.
Listen to this article
Loading audio...
The Conservative former Foreign Secretary told LBC's Tonight with Andrew Marr that when the bill passed its second reading in the House of Commons its sponsor, the Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, claimed there would be "incredibly robust protection".
But after it emerged in the subsequent stage that having a senior judge sign off each case would be a significant drain on judicial resources, Ms Leadbeater floated the possibility of a panel of experts, such as psychologists or social workers, making the call.
She called this 'judge plus' - which according to Mr Cleverly constitutes a deceptive use of language.
He told Andrew: "When the bill had its second reading on a Friday... it had a short debate with the whole of the House on the Friday, heavily oversubscribed.
Read more: Assisted dying cases could go ahead without judge's approval
"Time and time again, the proponents of the bill, Kim included, said that it would have this incredibly robust protection regime, including this basically judicial process.
Less than two weeks ago, when the rumours first started floating around that that was going to be downgraded, she and others said, 'no, no, no, no, no, keep the High Court Judge, the most robust framework in place', and then overnight, at very, very short notice, just before the sitting in committee that gets scrapped.
"It gets downgraded, and in a rather Orwellian use of language, it's being described as Judge Plus, when it talks about a KC being part of the panel.
"And KCs are not judges – senior lawyers, but not necessarily judges. And what strikes me is that this is changing so fast, using a process that is not really designed for complex, sensitive legislation like this."
Mr Cleverly, who was also a candidate in the post-election Tory leadership race, said that he thought the legislation - currently a private members' bill - should be taken on by the government so that MPs have more opportunity to scrutinise it.
He told Andrew: "A Private Members’ Bill has so many limitations, and this is a large, complex, and very, very sensitive piece of legislation. This should be dropped as a Private Members’ Bill… it's clearly got support from Keir Starmer. It should be taken over as a government bill and given the proper scrutiny in detail that it deserves.
"I'm not convinced that this is the right way forward. But if this does end up on the legislation books, if this does become law, it is absolutely key that the best quality legislation is passed, not just something that gets rattled through."
On Tuesday, Ms Leadbeater insisted that replacing a High Court judge's oversight of assisted dying applications with a panel of experts would not move the process behind closed doors.
"It wouldn't be done in private, it would be taking into account patient confidentiality but there would be public proceedings.
"And actually, I think it's really difficult to suggest that by having three experts involved in this extra layer of scrutiny that is somehow a change for the worse."
Doctor says we must 'sort out' palliative care sector before looking at assisted dying
Downing Street said the issue of changes to the bill were a matter for Parliament.
Asked if the Government had any input into the proposed changes, the Prime Minister's official spokesman said: "We've said as the Bill progresses through Parliament, the Government has a responsibility to make sure any legislation that passes through Parliament is effective and enforceable.
"So the Government has provided legal policy and drafting support in the preparation of amendments.
"The amendments seek to give legal and practical effect to the sponsors and Parliament's attempts, but ultimately it remains a Private Member's Bill and amendments from the sponsor are a matter for MPs and it will be up to the committee to decide whether to accept each amendment."
