A “voluntary commissioner” would oversee a panel of experts signing off assisted dying cases in place of a judge, according to the author of legislation going through the UK parliament.
In an amendment to the terminally ill adults (end of life) bill, Labour MP Kim Leadbeater said on Thursday that a voluntary assisted-dying commissioner would appoint a list of people eligible to sit on Assisted Dying Review Panels.
The commissioner, who must have held high office as a judge of the Supreme Court, Court of Appeal or High Court, would also monitor the operation of the act and report on it annually.
The change to the private members’ bill is the latest to have raised questions over the process underpinning the proposed law, which would grant people given six months or less to live the opportunity to end their own life in England and Wales.
On Monday Leadbeater proposed replacing the need for a High Court judge to approve an assisted death with a panel of experts including a legal figure such as a KC, in a move that critics said weakens one of the key safeguards against harm and coercion.
The move, which came hours before lawmakers began examining the legislation, prompted criticism from some MPs. Former Conservative home secretary James Cleverly called for the bill to be taken over by the government and “given the proper scrutiny in detail that it deserves”.
In a joint statement, five MPs including Labour’s Dame Meg Hillier said: “Just as recess starts the supporters of this bill have sprung yet another surprise upon MPs, this time the creation of a whole new body with panels and a distant civil service tsar to oversee assisted dying.”
In response, Leadbeater said the commissioner would be wholly independent from the government and a former or sitting judge.
Jill Rutter, senior fellow at the Institute for Government think-tank, said that had Leadbeater’s bill been government legislation, voters would have expected to see a green or white policy paper, as well as a public consultation.
“There should have been proper advance thinking about the impacts on the courts or the NHS,” she said. “A proper review, perhaps with citizen engagement, could have been used to establish how to balance the desires of those who want to see assisted dying with the safeguards others see as essential.”
After five hours of debate in November, a slim majority of 55 MPs backed the bill at its second reading after a free vote, in which parliamentarians are not whipped by their party to vote a particular way.
Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and his Conservative predecessor Rishi Sunak voted in favour, but health secretary Wes Streeting joined current Tory leader Kemi Badenoch in voting against the legislation.
Supporters of the bill argue that it is in the process of being properly scrutinised at committee stage in the House of Commons and will be again in the House of Lords before it can become law.
In the past laws allowing abortion and decriminalising homosexuality have also been passed by private members’ bills, they add.
But proposals by supporters of the bill to alter it so significantly have caused some uncertainty about its future. It is not guaranteed to become law when it is next voted on in April and could fail if just 28 MPs switched from “yes” to “no”.
Sarah Olney, a Liberal Democrat MP sitting on the bill committee who voted against the legislation in November, said there had been “quite a lot of disquiet [on the committee] about the decision to change the bill now”.
“It makes it really difficult to debate and scrutinise the legislation if we’re going to make material changes at this stage,” she said. “There’s a lot that should have been done at a pre-legislative stage. How can we possibly be expected to make some of these decisions at the committee?”
Lady Brenda Hale, former president of the UK’ Supreme Court, this week warned against removing judges from the process, saying a “judicial element” would “introduce an element of independence and distance from the doctors”.
One minister said they were in favour of removing High Court judges from the process of signing off an assisted dying case, but that it was a mis-step for Leadbeater to have put forward the amendment herself, since it left her open to criticism that she was bending to the will of government.
However, they added that they were still relatively confident that the bill would pass at third reading owing to indications that some MPs who voted against it in November had changed their mind.
“There are a lot of people who are pushing a narrative that there’s a majority of people who support the principle, but not a majority who support this bill,” the minister said, adding that they did not think there was enough evidence to support that claim.
“If we get just a few of the nos over, we win the day.”
