'It's a choice for terminally ill people about how they die': Kim Leadbeater makes plea ahead of assisted dying vote

20 June 2025, 11:35 | Updated: 20 June 2025, 12:22

The divisive Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill could either progress to the House of Lords or fall completely in a crunch Commons vote today.

It is the first time the Bill will be voted on in its entirety since last year's historic yes vote, when MPs supported the principle of assisted dying for England and Wales by a majority of 55.

Ministers are entitled to have a free vote on the Bill, meaning they decide according to their conscience rather than along party lines.

Kim Leadbeater, the MP who brought the bill forward, told the Commons the assisted dying Bill "is not a choice between living and dying - it is a choice for terminally ill people about how they die".

The Labour MP added: "I fully appreciate that there are some colleagues who would never vote for any version of this Bill due to their own fundamental beliefs - be they religious or otherwise - and I am respectful of their views, despite disagreeing, but to those colleagues who are supportive of a change in the law but are hesitant about if now is the time - if we don't vote to change the law today - what does that mean?

"It means we will have many more years of heartbreaking stories from terminally ill people and their families, of pain and trauma, suicide attempts, PTSD, lonely trips to Switzerland, police investigations and everything else we have all heard over recent months."

Read more: Woman, 69, charged with murder of film director 'killed for her diamond-encrusted Rolex'

Read more: Two e-scooter riding pro-Palestine activists breach RAF Brize Norton and sabotage two military jets

The Spen Valley MP insisted groups like palliative care doctors, and hospices were "not homogenous" after taking interventions from several MPs who pointed out concerns from these groups.

She added that voting no is ‘not a neutral act’, but it “is a vote for the status quo... and it fills me with despair to think MPs could be here in another 10 years' time hearing the same stories."

Sir Keir Starmer, who voted yes in November and also supported a 2015 attempt to legislate for assisted dying, said his position on the issue is "long-standing and well-known" - giving no suggestion his mind had changed on the matter.

Former Conservative minister James Cleverly said the bill is not a "now or never" decision on assisted dying, as he argued there will be "plenty of opportunities" in future.

The Tory MP told the commons: "We have got to recognise that this is an important moment, and whilst I respect (Kim Leadbeater), I disagree with her assessment that it is now or never, and it is this Bill or no Bill, and that to vote against this at third reading is a vote to maintain the status quo.

"None of those things are true. There will be plenty of opportunities. And indeed, we are duty bound and, I think, stimulated by this debate - which is why I don't criticise her for bringing it forward - stimulated by this debate to have a serious conversation about palliative care, a serious conversation about how we get to that."

Mr Cleverly said moments with his "dear friend" might have been "lost" if assisted dying was an option at the time of his death.

The former Home Secretary and Foreign Secretary urged ministers not to "sub-contract" scrutiny of the bill to peers, and that MPs should iron out the details of the bill before voting it through.

"We were told at second reading that a lot of the concerns, a lot of the worries, a lot of the detailed questions would be resolved through the committee process. We were promised the gold-standard, a judicially underpinned set of protections and safeguards," he said.

"Those protections did not make it through committee.

"And I've also heard where people are saying, 'well, there are problems, there are still issues, there are still concerns I have', well, 'the Lords will have their work to do'.

"But I don't think it is right and none of us should think that it is right to sub-contract our job to the other place (the House of Lords)."

Meanwhile, opponents of the bill warned against legislation they say is not safe enough to protect the most vulnerable.

While supporters of the Bill say it is coming back to the Commons with better safeguards after more than 90 hours of parliamentary time spent on it to date, opponents claim the process has been rushed and that changes to the Bill mean it is now weaker than it was when first introduced.

This week, dozens of Labour MPs opposed to the Bill urged a delay to the vote.

Asked whether he thought they were wrong to do so, Sir Keir told reporters in Canada: "It is a matter for individual parliamentarians, which is why I've not waded in with a view on this publicly, and I'm not going to now it's coming to a conclusion.

"There has been a lot of time discussing it, both in Parliament and beyond Parliament, and quite right too. It's a really serious issue.

"My own position is long-standing and well-known in relation to it, based on my experience when I was chief prosecutor for five years, where I oversaw every case that was investigated."

While the Prime Minister is among the high-profile supporters of the Bill, both Health Secretary Wes Streeting and Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood voted against it in November.

Meanwhile, Dame Esther Rantzen's daughter said she is "really hopeful" the Bill can pass the major vote, as she warned against "scaremongering" by opponents.

Rebecca Wilcox, the daughter of the terminally ill broadcaster and Childline founder Dame Esther, said: "We are really hopeful that we have the numbers (in the Commons).

"We obviously want people to keep writing to their MP, saying that they support the Bill, because we know that nationally the numbers are with us."

Ms Wilcox described the Bill as a "really safe, clever piece of law" and insisted its safeguards would ensure it is not extended beyond its current scope of terminally ill adults while it would improve on the "cruel status quo that exists at the moment".

Responding to warnings from opponents around those with depression or eating disorders being more vulnerable to being caught up in a new law, Ms Wilcox urged people against "scaremongering".

She said: "Yes, you may be depressed because you have a terminal diagnosis, but that's not to do with it. You can't just be depressed. You can't just have an eating disorder.

"And this is an example of some of the scaremongering that has been going on on the other side of the debate, and I completely understand that they are desperate to stop it, but if you are desperate to stop it, please don't exaggerate the truth. Please don't exaggerate a lie."

Speaking during a debate on amendments to the Bill last week, Labour MP Rupa Huq warned that "in a cost-of-living crisis, assisted dying could be quite attractive", as she pledged to be a "voice of the voiceless".

She said while she probably would have supported such a Bill in her younger years, "10 years of being an MP has exposed me to coercion, duress, the millionaire price of London property and elder abuse".

She added: "We know that Esther Rantzen wants this. We know Jonathan Dimbleby wants this. But our role is to be the voice of the voiceless as well."

Asked about her mother - who has terminal cancer and has been outspoken in campaigning for a change in the law - Ms Wilcox said Dame Esther is "coping" as she nears her 85th birthday this weekend.

She told Sky: "She's coping. This has been a long slog, and we're hoping that we can maybe have a rest this weekend, particularly as it is her birthday on Sunday.

"So we are so grateful and so appreciative of all the time that we have with her, particularly as she turns 85 looking rather fabulous."

Gordon Macdonald, chief executive of opposition campaign group Care Not Killing, said their polling had suggested the public "is deeply concerned that this Bill could put pressure on vulnerable people to end their lives prematurely".

He added: "These problems will be compounded if Parliament continues to rush this legislation, fails to restore safeguards such as the scrutiny of the High Court and fixing palliative and end-of-life care in the UK, which is in crisis.

"This is why, day by day, more and more disabled people, doctors, nurses, lawyers and campaigners are urging MPs to kill the Bill, not the sick and vulnerable."

As it stands, the proposed legislation would allow terminally ill adults in England and Wales, with fewer than six months to live, to apply for an assisted death, subject to approval by two doctors and a panel featuring a social worker, senior legal figure and psychiatrist.