HENRY TUFNELL MP will vote in favour of Kim Leadbetter MP’s Private Member’s Bill on the emotive subject of legalising assisted dying.

Under the Bill, terminally ill adults with a prognosis of six months or less could seek assistance to end their life, provided two doctors and a High Court judge confirm their eligibility and voluntary decision.

“A PROFOUNDLY COMPLEX ISSUE”

In a statement on his website, the Mid & South Pembrokeshire Labour MP said: “Assisted dying remains a profoundly complex and personal issue, and I’m grateful for the thoughtful input I receive from so many of you. Recently, Kim Leadbeater MP introduced a Private Members’ Bill on this topic, meaning a meaningful debate and potential reform could soon be on the horizon. 

“I support the idea of legalising assisted dying for mentally competent, terminally ill adults, provided strong safeguards are in place. This Bill, like all Private Members’ Bills, allows MPs to vote according to their conscience, ensuring a cross-party discussion that respects diverse views.

“For me, any change in law must prioritise protecting vulnerable individuals while addressing the autonomy of those facing terminal illness. Whatever happens, it’s vital to continue prioritising access to high-quality palliative and end-of-life care.

“In Wales, we’re fortunate to have a devolved approach to end-of-life care, with the Welsh Government allocating over £10.5 million annually. Quality care should always remain a priority, supporting dignity and choice at the end of life. 

 “Thank you again to everyone who has shared their views on assisted dying with me. This issue is both sensitive and significant, and I look forward to ensuring our community’s voice is heard in this conversation.”

We asked Mr Tufnell to expand on his stance, particularly regarding the use of scarce legal, judicial, and health resources.

A spokesperson for Mr Tufnell told The Pembrokeshire Herald: “Henry’s decision to support the Bill at this stage is informed by his belief in treating individuals facing terminal illness with dignity and compassion and upholding their right to autonomy over end-of-life decisions. However, it is important to note that this Bill is currently at the Second Reading stage, which is an opportunity to debate the principles of the proposed legislation rather than its detailed implementation.”

THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS EXPLAINED

As a Private Members’ Bill, Kim Leadbeater MP introduced this legislation rather than the Government. Such Bills often focus on issues of personal conscience or areas where public debate is necessary.

While many Private Members’ Bills do not progress to becoming law, the Second Reading allows Parliament to assess whether the issue deserves further scrutiny. If the Bill passes this stage, it will proceed to the Committee stage, where MPs will examine its details and consider amendments.

Henry Tufnell’s spokesperson told us: “Henry believes it is vital to give this Bill the opportunity for detailed consideration and public discussion, recognising the ethical complexities it addresses.”

PAYING TO DIE

The issues surrounding the cost of delivering the legislation have been lost in the ethical arguments made by both sides of the debate. However, if the ratio of deaths through assisted dying matches that in the US state of Oregon, used as a touchstone by the Bill’s backers, approximately 3,500 deaths each year will come under the Bill’s provisions.

Those 3,500 deaths would take place following a process involving two doctors who would have to certify the request’s validity and the mental capacity of the person making it. If the doctors okay the request, an application will be made to a judge in the High Court Family Division. Only after a senior and appropriately qualified judge approved the application – which is potentially little more than a hearing followed by a rubber-stamping exercise, would the individual be able to make arrangements for their life to be ended on the NHS.

There are interlocking issues about the resources needed at each step. The first is the availability of the requisite expertise among appropriately qualified doctors. Secondly, the Bill’s proposal to use the High Court Family Division faces even greater issues regarding the availability of enough senior judges to hear and decide on an application.

There is a shortage of judges in the Family Division and a reluctance by sufficiently senior and experienced specialist lawyers to apply for a judicial appointment in it. In addition, in 2022/23, the Family Division of the High Court sat for around 19,000 hours. If the Bill becomes law, the number of sitting hours would increase to around 50,000. There is simply no spare capacity in the system for that level of judicial hours. The idea that the system could somehow “fast-track” applications under the Assisted Dying Bill’s terms runs a coach and horses through the idea that proposed safeguards are adequate or adequately thought through.

Finally, the lethal drugs would be administered using NHS facilities. Those seeking to die using state resources would necessarily displace resources that could be used elsewhere in a health service under extraordinary pressure and already short of resources.

As applications under the Assisted Dying Bill would not be eligible for Legal Aid, the Bill runs the considerable risk of being inaccessible to the terminally ill poor or those unable to afford the level of legal expertise needed to engage with the process.

A QUESTION OF RESOURCES

Mr Tufnell’s spokesperson said: “Henry is aware that implementing any future legislation on assisted dying would require careful planning to ensure sufficient judicial and legal oversight. That would include addressing concerns around clear safeguards and resource allocation.

“The Bill acknowledges the NHS’s central role in supporting individuals at the end of life. If the legislation progresses, Henry will work with colleagues to ensure adequate funding and training for healthcare professionals, alongside enhanced investment in palliative and mental health services.”

LISTENING AND DECIDING

Mr Tufnell’s spokesperson concluded: “Henry’s decision to support the Bill reflects extensive engagement with constituents and medical professionals. He has listened to the perspectives of those who feel strongly both for and against the proposal and has been guided by a commitment to enabling informed choices within a safe and regulated system.

“He recognises the significant public support for giving individuals greater autonomy at the end of life, but also the importance of balancing this with strong protections. The Second Reading stage provides a vital opportunity for Parliament to debate these issues in depth.

“Should the Bill progress further, Henry will continue to engage closely with stakeholders to ensure the proposed legislation is both compassionate and workable.”