Committee examining assisted suicide bill ‘is skewed’, ‘a stitch-up’… and may have breached UN convention

Disabled campaigners have raised serious concerns about the fairness of the committee of MPs that is carrying out detailed examination of a bill to legalise assisted suicide, after it prevented any disabled people’s organisations (DPOs) from giving evidence in person.

The actions of the committee, led by Labour MP Kim Leadbeater (pictured, standing), appear to have breached the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD), and the duty it imposes to “closely consult with and actively involve” disabled people through DPOs when developing laws relating to disabled people.

It emerged on Tuesday that nearly two-thirds of the witnesses who will give oral evidence to the committee in the coming weeks have previously expressed support for legalising assisted suicide.

And, of the eight witnesses who were proposed by Leadbeater to give oral evidence about foreign countries and states that have legalised assisted suicide, all eight are in favour of legalisation, despite huge concerns about laws introduced in countries such as Belgium, the Netherlands, Canada, and parts of the US and Australia.

The list of proposed witnesses was put together by Leadbeater, who is trying to steer the private member’s bill – which will apply to England and Wales – through the House of Commons.

The committee she is leading – which is dominated by MPs who support legalisation –  decided on Tuesday that it would not hear oral evidence from any DPOs, even though disabled people and their organisations have been at the heart of opposition to Leadbeater’s terminally ill adults (end of life) bill.

The first tranche of witnesses was published this morning (Thursday), and it includes no DPOs, although Chelsea Roff, the founder of Eat Breathe Thrive, which describes itself as “a community of people with lived experience of eating disorders”, is listed as a witness.

Disabled peer Baroness [Tanni] Grey-Thompson, an opponent of legalisation, told DNS yesterday that she was “very concerned” by the committee’s actions.

She said: “There must be balance in terms of the witnesses called and an impartial look at other jurisdictions.”

She added: “There are lots of claims that this is the most tightly-worded bill in the world, but I have not seen evidence of this.”

Tony Jennings, a prominent disabled activist, who usually focuses in his work on accessible transport, said he believed the actions of the committee show the parliamentary process “now looks like a stitch up”.

He said: “Disabled people will pay with their lives as there is no way to prevent coercion and the safeguards will not work.”

He said it was clear the evidence sessions would not be fair and balanced when nearly two-thirds of the witnesses will be in favour of legalisation.

He added: “Kim Leadbeater must now explain why there is no representation from disabled people’s groups so that they can express their specific concerns about the bill.”

He said the events of the week showed why disabled people were “terrified for their lives”.

Paula Peters, a member of the national steering group of Disabled People Against Cuts, told DNS that it was “deeply concerning and troubling” to see how the committee was selecting witnesses to give oral evidence, including blocking DPOs from appearing before the committee.

She said: “The committee seems very skewed towards the pro-assisted dying lobby and supporters. That’s unacceptable.”

She said it was an “appalling situation”, and she urged disabled people across England and Wales to contact their MPs and raise their worries and concerns about the committee’s actions.

The aim of Tuesday’s hearing was to agree when the committee would hear oral evidence from witnesses in the coming weeks, and which experts would be asked to give that evidence.

There was particular concern raised among opponents of the bill – and some of those who support legalisation – that Leadbeater and her supporters on the committee were refusing to allow an expert from the Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCP) to give evidence, despite huge concerns about the issues of capacity and the risk of coercion of people with terminal illness if the bill becomes law.

Conservative MP Kit Malthouse, a strong supporter of legalisation, claimed in Tuesday’s hearing that allowing someone from RCP to give evidence would create a risk that they would “double up” in their expertise with other medical experts, “which was not necessarily in the interests of time”.

Leadbeater was later forced to back down, and yesterday morning announced that an RCP expert would now be allowed to give evidence.

Among those the committee is refusing to hear evidence from is disabled activist Ellen Clifford, who was played a key role in coordinating disabled people’s opposition to the bill, and who coordinates the coalition of DPOs that monitors UNCRPD implementation in the UK.

The Conservative MP who has led opposition to the bill, Danny Kruger, told the committee on Tuesday that Clifford had just won a high court case she took against the last government over its benefit reforms (see separate story) and so was “no friend of my party”.

But he said she was “a very, very powerful advocate on behalf of disabled people” and played an important role as coordinator of the UN monitoring coalition.

The committee has so far refused to allow Clifford to be added to the list of witnesses.

There was also concern raised by the bill’s opponents on the committee about the failure to hear from critics of legalisation in countries such as Canada, which has some of the most permissive assisted suicide laws in the world and where “medical assistance in dying” was the sixth highest cause of death in 2022.

The committee is also only inviting evidence from experts from Australia who are in favour of legalisation, and not any of the leading Australian experts who have raised concerns about how assisted suicide laws have been implemented.

Kruger said it was vital to hear from politicians in Australia who were opposed to the legalisation and “continue to very profoundly oppose it on the grounds that it’s not working and it’s dangerous and it’s being expanded”.

Malthouse said there was no need to hear from experts in Canada, where legislation was “very different” to Leadbeater’s bill, and he claimed Leadbeater had produced a list of witnesses which was “a compromise”.

But Kruger told fellow members of the committee that it was “an unbalanced list” of witnesses.

He said his “quick analysis” of almost 60 names proposed by Leadbeater was that 38 of them were in favour of legalisation, and just 20 were opposed, while all eight from “foreign jurisdictions” were “supportive” of legalising assisted suicide.

He said: “I’m not surprised [Malthouse] does not want to hear from Canada because the stories there are so appalling.”

Dr Simon Opher, a Labour supporter of the bill, claimed that the split of 38 witnesses to 20 (66 per cent to 34 per cent) was “an appropriate split and actually reflects the vote in the Commons”, even though the Commons vote was 330 MPs in favour to 275 against the bill (55 per cent to 45 per cent) at its second reading.

Kruger told him: “He doesn’t want to hear from Canada. I don’t blame him. People who are in favour of this bill are desperate to keep Canada out of it.”

Leadbeater said she had been given more than 100 names of potential witnesses.

She claimed she had tried to be “extremely balanced” in drawing up the list so there were “people with a range of views and opinions but most importantly, there are people we will hear from who have got expertise”.

She said: “I’m very happy that we will hear from so many witnesses over a period of several days, and I’m, again, very happy that I have added more time to that so we can hear from more witnesses.”

Even before the committee’s hearing, there were concerns that, although a strong majority of disabled MPs voted against the bill at its second reading, none of them are members of the bill committee, while one of the two disabled MPs who voted in favour – Dr Marie Tidball – is on the committee.

Oral evidence will begin on Tuesday (28 January).

A note from the editor:

Please consider making a voluntary financial contribution to support the work of DNS and allow it to continue producing independent, carefully-researched news stories that focus on the lives and rights of disabled people and their user-led organisations.

Please do not contribute if you cannot afford to do so, and please note that DNS is not a charity. It is run and owned by disabled journalist John Pring and has been from its launch in April 2009.

Thank you for anything you can do to support the work of DNS…