Dr Marie Tidball
MP for Penistone and Stocksbridge · Labour · United Kingdom
“As the summer holidays approach and with all the lovely sunny weather, I really hope that children across my constituency take the chance to spend plenty of time playing outside.”
“Yesterday I had the pleasure of welcoming the Barnsley-based charity LimbBo Foundation, along with the Limb Loss and Limb Difference UK alliance to Parliament to celebrate Disability Pride Month. The alliance launched its campaign to end the postcode lottery of services and support for people with limb loss and limb difference.”
“Today we are launching our petition to save Scout Dike activity centre in my constituency with fantastic local campaigners Darren Padgett and Nick Stubbs. We are campaigning against Barnsley council’s plans to sell off this valuable community asset for development.”
“I welcome the review and thank disabled people, who have shaped it. Last year, I was pleased that the Minister accepted my amendment to the Universal Credit Bill to ensure that co-production with disabled people was put at the heart of the Timms review before any future changes to PIP were brought forward.”
“Will the Minister agree to come back to the House with the full findings of his report and to ensure that changes to PIP are joined up with the findings of the two other reviews, so that there is strategic coherence across Government policy on getting more disabled people into work?”
“I welcome the Secretary of State’s statement and the work of Baroness Amos on this vital report. Disabled women are 44% more likely to suffer a stillbirth than non-disabled women.”
The complete record
Every one of 386 lines we hold for Dr Marie Tidball, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 8.
“I am glad to hear my hon. Friend’s answer. I ask that question because I can imagine an analogous situation of a woman suffering from breast cancer who is allergic to opioids but does not know that when she enters the care home. If her cancer reaches a stage of terminality but she cannot pursue palliative options because of her allergy to opioids, assisted dying would be the only option for her to die with dignity and not in great discomfort. Under my hon. Friend’s scenario, that woman would not be able to pursue an assisted death in that care home.”
“To clarify, in my very clear example—it is a real-life example that reflects the experiences of someone who attended this Committee yesterday—the person has a terminal condition and enters a care home that makes her comfortable and is near her family, but discovers while the hospice or care home is trying to find methods to palliate that she is allergic to opioids and therefore her condition cannot be palliated. In the hon. Lady’s scenario, she would not be able to choose assisted death because that care home has a blanket policy against it. That would discriminate against that young woman, who has an allergy to opioids that means that she cannot be palliated.”
“For the avoidance of doubt, socioeconomic status would have been a protected characteristic under the Equality Act, were it not for the previous Conservative Government.”
“I beg to move amendment 517, in clause 30, page 18, line 30, at end insert— “(da) arrangements for a qualifying person requesting assistance to end their own life to receive the support of an independent advocate under section [ Independent advocate ].” This amendment would add arrangements for a qualifying person to receive the support of an independent advocate (NC25) to the list of matters that codes of practice may be issued on.”
“It also extends the scope to cover those who, as set out in subsection (4), “may experience substantial difficulty in understanding the processes or information relevant to those processes or communicating their views, wishes or feelings; or…meet criteria that the Secretary of State may specify by regulations.””
“He said: “We could have more of an advocate for the person who is requesting assisted dying—somebody who will support them, within the law, to make that decision or to think about their decision.” –– [ Official Report, Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Public Bill Committee, 29 January 2025; c.144, Q181.] My new clause responds to the evidence from witnesses during those sessions and augments proposals made by my hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford. It extends those proposals in two ways. Under the new clause, “qualifying person” would include those with a learning disability, those with autism and, importantly, those who have a mental disorder under section 1 of the Mental Health Act 1983.”
“Subsection (3) of new clause 25 states: “The role of independent advocates is to provide support and advocacy to a qualifying person who is seeking to understand options around end of life care, including the possibility of requesting assistance to end their own life, to enable them to effectively understand and engage with all the provisions of this Act.” During one of the Committee’s oral evidence sessions, Professor Tom Shakespeare—the leading disability scholar and public policy expert—was asked which of the Bill’s measures could be strengthened to further protect disabled people.”
“In order to ensure that there is compassionate choice at the end of life, it is right that the Bill is tightly drawn around the final stage of terminal illness for adults and includes the strongest safeguards.” —[ Official Report , 29 November 2024; Vol. 757, c.1052.] Those safeguards must include strengthening the voices of disabled people, both in the Bill and in the monitoring of its impact on disabled people if it is ultimately enacted. I tabled new clause 25 and the related amendment 517 alongside my proposed new clause 27, which would mandate a disability programme board to strengthen disabled people’s voices, empowering and better enabling them to be treated with dignity and respect when they are a qualifying person seeking to understand their options around end-of-life care.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I rise to speak to my new clause 25 and my related amendment 517. I note with pleasure that the Committee has agreed to amendment 447, which mandates the need for the code of practice. I also support amendment 394, tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford. My new clause 25 would require the Secretary of State to make provision by regulations for independent advocates to provide assistance to qualifying persons under the Bill. Amendment 517 would add “arrangements for a qualifying person…to receive the support of an independent advocate” to the list of matters provided for by the codes of practice in clause 30. The issue is deeply important to me. On Second Reading, I said: “so often control is taken away from disabled people in all sorts of circumstances.”
“I take on board and appreciate my hon. Friend’s point. I hope he will agree that subsection (3) emphasises the purpose of the new clause, which is that it should apply across the spectrum of access to assistance and enable people to effectively understand and engage with all of the provisions in the Bill. I very much wanted to ensure that it would apply and be accessible at every stage.”
“First, it is necessary that a patient should be able to engage with all the provisions in the Bill. The reason I did not support the previous amendments from my hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford was that they would only have provided advocacy at too late a stage and would not effectively support a patient at that point we talked about in clause 4, which is around the moment of seeking assistance. I hope that answers the question.”
“I should add that new clause 25(2)(e), on training, is central and will also assist in that respect. If the Chair will permit, that is why I talked about new clause 27, which builds in a strong structure that can reflect on how the provisions operate in practice.”
“Amendment made: 417, in clause 30, page 18, line 32, at end insert— “(1A) The Secretary of State must, within six months of the passing of this Act, issue one or more codes of practice in connection with the arrangements for ensuring effective communication in connection with the provision of assistance to persons in accordance with this Act, including the use of interpreters.”— (Jack Abbott.) This amendment is linked to Amendment 416. Amendments made: 216, in clause 30, page 18, line 37, leave out subsection (4). See the statement for Amendment 188. Amendment 217, in clause 30, page 18, line 38, leave out “that procedure” and insert “section 39”.— (Kim Leadbeater.) See the statement for Amendment 188.”
“Amendment made: 534, in clause 30, page 18, line 30, at end insert— “(da) the forms of proof of identity that are acceptable for the purposes of section 6.”— (Jack Abbott.) Amendment made: 523, in clause 30, page 18, line 31, leave out paragraph (e) and insert— “(1A) The Secretary of State may issue one or more codes of codes of practice in connection with any matters relating to the operation of this Act not required under subsection (1) as the Secretary of State considers appropriate.”— (Danny Kruger.) This amendment, which works together with Amendment 447, would clarify that the Secretary of State is not required to issue a code of practice under subsection (1)(e) but instead has the discretionary power to issue further codes of practice as the Secretary of State considers appropriate.”
“I hope, as I said in an earlier response to the hon. Member for East Wiltshire, that that will provide a solid and robust opportunity to monitor the impact on disabled people of the Bill, if it does pass through Parliament, through its implementation and in practice. Taken together, the measures will create a solid foundation to enable disabled people to have a voice and will provide a strong structure for accountability in the Bill. I acknowledge the Minister’s comments, and will work with him and my hon. Friend the Member for Spen Valley to ensure that it is watertight. Amendment 517 agreed to.”
“I am grateful for the support of my hon. Friends the Members for Spen Valley and for Bexleyheath and Crayford. It sounds that I may also have the support of the hon. Member for East Wiltshire, which also makes me very happy at this stage of the evening! I tabled these amendments because I passionately believe in inclusive healthcare for disabled people, removing barriers to such healthcare where possible, and ensuring that disabled people have a strong voice in advocating for themselves and the healthcare they need or desire. I have tried to write the amendment and the new clause to ensure that access to an independent advocate operates across the functions of the Bill. I have been keen to ensure that this provision acts in conjunction with new clause 27, which I will speak about at a later stage.”
“What work has she done to develop inclusive growth strategies across all employment sectors, to close the disability employment gap and the disability pay gap?”
“After 14 years of Conservative failure, there is a 29% employment gap and a 17% pay gap for disabled people in this country. We must therefore ensure that the social model of disability is central to Government decision making, to achieve inclusive growth that enables disabled people to fulfil their potential. I welcome the Secretary of State’s proactive approach to reasonable adjustments and the £1 billion support package to get disabled people back into work where they can work, as well as her recognition that PIP is designed as an in-work benefit to enable people to live independently. Research shows that supportive, incentive-based approaches massively outperform cuts or sanctions in getting disabled people into sustainable employment.”
“I supported the Bill on Second Reading on the basis of the High Court proposal, but then read very closely the evidence from Justice Munby on the need for a strengthened evidentiary process so that this is not just a rubber-stamping exercise. He said, secondly, that it would be better to replace the High Court with another system because of the position that it would place judges in. Having listened to 50 witnesses, I am satisfied with this proposal; I was persuaded through this cross-party process, which is an incredible example of deliberative decision making. Does the hon. Gentleman agree that our ability to amend the Bill where the evidence shows that we must do so demonstrates the strength of this process, and has enabled us to produce something much better and more in alignment with public opinion?”
“On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker. I would like to correct the record and make a declaration of interests. In my excitement while making my first intervention during proceedings on the Employment Rights Bill yesterday, I did not point Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests or mention my proud membership of the Community, GMB and Unison unions. I would like to ensure that that is on the record as well as in the register.”
“New clause 21(4)(e) says that the panel “may ask any person appearing to it to have relevant knowledge or experience to report to it on such matters relating to the person to whom the referral relates as it considers appropriate.” Does my hon. Friend not agree that the expertise of the three panel members, as set out in the new clause, will mean they will very much have the ability to identify, on the basis of that subsection, the kind of individuals and the knowledge required?”
“I wonder whether my hon. Friend agrees with Julie Abraham, the CEO of Richer Sounds, who says: “Happy colleagues are likely to be more productive. This also leads to reduced stock loss and higher staff retention, which in turn, minimises recruitment and training costs, not to mention disruption to established teams.””
“Flooding has caused heartache for families and communities in my constituency. In order to be protected from extreme flooding, they desperately need Sheffield city council’s excellent proposals for the upper Don flood alleviation scheme, including work on the Clough Dike culvert and Whitley Brook improvements. Despite widespread local support and the importance of that scheme, the Conservatives never actually allocated funding to it. Will the Leader of the House allow time to debate flood alleviation schemes, to ensure that the appropriate funding is allocated in the forthcoming spending review?”
“Upon discharge, the occupational therapy team had no specialist advice on how I could breastfeed outside of my home or carry my baby. I became increasingly dependent on family members. I was exhausted and lost my confidence, not because of anything I had done, but because the structures that were meant to support me did not know how to do so. My experience came eight years after the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities raised concerns that the UK had failed to mainstream disabled women’s rights into healthcare. This week, the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine has published a report demonstrating that disabled women are more likely to experience stillbirth, have lower rates of breastfeeding, and endure longer post-natal hospital stays.”
“In contrast, when I was pregnant, my body was no longer just a topic of medical scrutiny; my womanhood was no longer invisible. I wanted my maternity to be embraced by a healthcare system that supported me in my journey, but that was not my reality. Instead, the system was unprepared for a body like mine. Early on, I was triaged to a genetic counselling service. I was left feeling devastated. As my pregnancy progressed, there were no specialist midwifery teams, and the lack of awareness of the interaction between my disability and maternity continued. I had to be induced at 37 weeks, leading to a caesarean section. My core muscles were severely impacted and I was left debilitated. After birth, the en-suite room I was put in was inaccessible—the very space that was meant to aid my recovery became another barrier.”
“The first time I saw the Alison Lapper Pregnant sculpture in Trafalgar Square, it took my breath away. The swollen belly of Lapper spoke of a body that was loved and carried life. It said, “I exist—bodies like mine exist, and therein there is beauty. We shall no longer be invisible.” However, unlike non-disabled women, our experiences of pregnancy have not been celebrated or discussed. When I found out in 2017 that I was pregnant, I was filled with joy and a deep connection to my body and unborn child. Growing up, the absence of disabled women’s representation in discussions of sexuality, relationships, menstruation, menopause and maternity left me feeling that my womanhood did not count—that it was vitiated by my visible physical disability.”
“Finally, we must ensure that healthcare facilities, equipment and information are accessible, and that reasonable adjustments to maternity wards enable disabled women to recover from birth with dignity.”
“I certainly do, and I want to ensure that our health services take a more intersectional approach. Indeed, UK maternity policy continues to overlook women’s needs. Now it is time for action. Disabled women should experience high-quality, inclusive maternity care. We need joined-up, meaningful, inclusive maternity care pathways throughout pregnancy, birth and the post-natal period to improve access, experience and outcomes for disabled women. Crucially, there must be nothing about us without us. Disabled women must be central in improving maternity care services, and while I met some wonderful clinicians, we must increase their understanding through better training and update clinical guidelines to secure appropriate care.”
“Does my hon. Friend agree that she is a phenomenal role model, as a woman with a great knowledge of business? She brings her special expertise to Business and Trade Committee, having worked in the fashion industry.”
“Is it not a positive development that our Government announced this week that young girls would no longer be placed in young offender institutions?”
“I thank my hon. Friend for his amendments, and I agree with their principle. My concern is that, again, people with mental disorders are left out. Does he agree that, if there were a way to amend the Bill later so that they could be incorporated in these proposals, that would be a positive step forward?”
“As my hon. Friend knows, I have a great deal of respect for him, so I gently say that if he brings forward similar amendments later in the Bill, I would be delighted to talk to him and I ask him to include mental disorders.”
“Forty-eight children that we know of have been killed by known domestically abusive parents during court-permitted contact visits, including Paul and Jack Sykes, who were tragically murdered at the hands of their father in a house fire. Their mother, and my constituent, Claire Throssell has campaigned against the presumption of contact, which allows such abusers to have unsupervised contact with their children. Will the Prime Minister meet Claire and me to discuss the urgent need to remove the presumption of contact in law?”
“The BMA goes further, stating: “Some patients find it difficult to bring up sensitive subjects in their consultations,” Being able to have these discussions is necessary and helpful.”
“I support amendments 183 and 275 because, having looked closely at barriers to access to healthcare for disabled people and others over the past 15 years, I believe in the need for transparency, accessibility and equality of choice of healthcare as a fundamental key principle. The BMA’s written evidence, at paragraph 5.6, sets out its support for clause 4. In particular, it expounds on the principle that there should be no prohibition on a doctor initiating discussion with a patient about assisted dying. Doctors should be trusted to use their professional judgment to decide when and if discussion about assisted dying would be appropriate, taking their cue from the patient as they do on other issues.”
“Amendment 183, in the name of my hon. Friend the Member for Spen Valley, emphasises that the initial discussion under clause 4(3) may not be conducted without also explaining and discussing the matters mentioned in subsection (4). It would ensure that the registered medical practitioner must explain to and discuss with the person their diagnosis and prognosis, any treatment available and its likely effect. Amendment 275, in the name of my hon. Friend the Member for Sunderland Central, would ensure that they also discussed “all available” palliative, hospice or other care, including symptom management and psychological support.”
“In my speech on Second Reading, I said: “The choice of assisted dying as one option for adults when facing six months’ terminal illness must be set alongside the choice of receiving the best possible palliative and end of life care, or it is no choice at all. Having analysed the Bill closely, therefore, there are changes I would want to see in Committee to strengthen those options and ensure the way that choice is presented by medical practitioners is always in the round.” —[ Official Report , 29 November 2024; Vol. 757, c. 1052.] I am satisfied that the amendments from my hon. Friends the Members for Spen Valley and for Sunderland Central will strengthen the Bill in that way, ensuring that choice for those seeking assistance is more efficient and effectively presented in the round by medical practitioners.”
“I rise to speak in support of the hon. Member for Spen Valley. I thank her for driving amendment 183 forward and for taking on board my input and that of others on strengthening the language in the clause to include the amendment. I will set out why I support clause 4 overall, as augmented by the language in the hon. Lady’s amendment 183, along with amendment 275 from my hon. Friend the Member for Sunderland Central, and amendment 108. To ensure that there is a compassionate choice at the end of life, it is right that the Bill is tightly drawn around the final stage of terminal illness for adults and includes the strongest safeguards.”
“I will make progress. Clause 4 creates no duty to raise assisted dying, a point supported by the BMA. Keeping things secret is not helpful for the patient making such difficult decisions about how best to live their death with dignity and respect.”
“If the Bill is passed by Parliament without them, it will exacerbate health inequalities rather than abating them. Together, the amendments expound and elaborate on the need for discussion of all appropriate palliative and other end-of-life options available to someone with a six-month terminal illness. I commend them to the Committee.”
“I will make progress. In reply to a question from me about those who are seeking assistance, Dr Jane Neerkin, a consultant physician in palliative medicine, said: “For them, it is about trying to regain some of that control and autonomy and being able to voice for themselves what they want. That is what I tend to see that people want back at the end of life.” –– [ Official Report, Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Public Bill Committee, 29 January 2025; c. 201, Q263.] Importantly, amendments 183 and 275 would strengthen clause 4 to ensure that we avoid a situation that gives those with the most social capital more choice, while leaving those who might otherwise be unaware of all other options available to them without that choice.”
“To build on the points the hon. Members for Reigate and for East Wiltshire were trying to make, does the Minister agree that a reasonable person on the street would believe that the act of disconnecting a respirator was a positive act? Currently, the Mental Capacity Act is applied to that act in relation to decision making; that is therefore analogous to the process for which it will be used in relation to this Bill.”
“I am sorry, Mrs Harris, but I may have risen too soon. I want to speak to amendment 339, but I would first like to hear from my hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford, who tabled it.”
“Does the hon. Member therefore disagree with the British Medical Association, whose evidence to the Committee has said specifically: “We support the Bill’s balanced position such that there is no prohibition on raising assisted dying with eligible patients where, in their professional judgement, the doctor considers this to be appropriate—but there is also no duty to raise it”. The implication is that the Bill gets that balance correct.”
“I have worked closely with Mencap on the amendments that I am drawing up and will continue to do so, and I would welcome input from my hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford. Although I support his intent in principle, I will be tabling amendments to cover a broader group of individuals to access such appropriate adults and independent advocates, so that they can seek and access advocacy across the pathway and period of seeking assistance. My amendments would put access to appropriate adults and independent mental health advocates on a much firmer footing in the Bill.”
“Friend, but I want to make sure that we specifically include the language of “mental disorder”, to make sure that that particular group of people with mental health problems is able to access independent advocates, as well as those with learning disabilities and autism. I am also looking at whether we need a consequential amendment or new clause that would make the Secretary of State put in place provisions for regulations as to the appointment of persons as independent advocates in order to ensure that those seeking assistance under the legislation who have a learning disability, autism or a mental disorder can have proper access to such advocates. That would strengthen the resource provision and access for that group.”
“My amendments will go beyond amendment 339 and amend the code of practice so that seeking advocacy and access to an appropriate adult applies across the pathway to those seeking assistance, not merely in relation to the content of clause 4, as in that amendment. I want to ensure that access to an independent advocate or appropriate adult is expanded to cover those with autism, a learning disability or a mental disorder, which is not currently covered by amendment 339. That will enable those people to engage with any of the provisions under this Bill through the support that they would receive from an independent advocate or appropriate adult. As I say, I am also seeking to strengthen access to such advocacy across the pathway, through seeking assistance at each stage. I have huge respect for my hon.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I will be supporting amendments 319 and 320 tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford. I am a great admirer of my hon. Friend’s work in championing people with learning disabilities, and his mission to give them a strong voice in this Bill. It is an area very close to my heart, having spent over a decade and a half working with people with learning disabilities and the advocacy organisations that support them. I will, however, not be supporting my hon. Friend’s amendment 339, merely because I am drafting something to strengthen those measures even further.”
“Does the Minister agree that the language of clause 2(1)(a)— “cannot be reversed by treatment”— is reassuring? Indeed, the written evidence from Professor Emily Jackson notes: “Someone with a condition that is not inevitably progressive, or which could be reversed by treatment, would be ineligible under the Act.” That covers the case raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Ipswich.”
“I stand here as a disabled woman. Under the Bill, as a disabled woman, I would not —by reason only of being a disabled woman—be eligible to have access to assisted dying. The amendment clarifies that I would not be eligible only through being a woman who has a disability. However, if I develop a condition that means that I have a terminal illness, leaving me with only six months left to live, I would be permitted to have that choice. It is right, I think, that I should have that choice. As I said in my Second Reading speech, this is about giving people access to a good death and living a good death. This is about giving that choice, where they choose to make it, to disabled people, while building in sufficient safeguards so that this is not something pressed upon them—”