YouSaid · the spoken record
Kim Leadbeater
We hold 46 passages that may be Kim Leadbeater’s. We do not publish them until we can confirm who spoke. See the correction.
On the record 2021–2026
hansard · podcast
Every line below is reproduced as it was said and credited to the record it came from, and links to that record wherever it can be linked. Nothing here is summarised or generated. Directory · Search · Corrections
“I beg to move amendment 479, in clause 17, page 11, line 37, leave out “at” and insert “with”. This amendment clarifies that a cancellation may be given to a practitioner with the person’s GP practice.”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The amendment, which would clarify the drafting, speaks for itself. The important point is that the record of cancellation be with the GP practice as soon as is practicable. It is not necessary for that to take place physically at the practice, as that could potentially delay its delivery.”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I commend the amendment to the Committee. Amendment 479 agreed to. Clause 17, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 18 Provision of assistance Amendment made: 378, in clause 18, page 12, line 9, leave out paragraph (a) and insert— “(a) a certificate of eligibility has been granted in respect of a person,”. —(Kim Leadbeater.) This amendment is consequential on NC21.”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We need to be really sensitive to that, having heard so many examples of families who have been through these really difficult situations. But the hon. Gentleman makes a very good point, and I am minded to support his amendment because I think it comes from a good place.”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The hon. Gentleman is making a powerful speech, and I thank him for the respectful way in which he is doing so. He has given an example of a very personal story; it is also important to remember the other personal stories we have all heard. We have with us today in the Public Gallery family members who have lost loved ones. Catie’s mum went to Dignitas in Switzerland for an assisted death, and her daughter could not go with her. As a family they have suffered to this day as a result of that experience. We need to be really careful about the language we use around suicide. We have spoken about this before. The cases we have heard of are not people who want to die. They are people who want to live, but they are terminally ill.”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The hon. Member is making an interesting philosophical point with his biblical references. I think the point he may be making is that there might not be any difference for the individual, as the result is sadly the same, but I put it to him that there is quite a significant difference for the other person. If we think about the autonomy of the medical professionals we ask to be involved in the process, there is a strong argument that it would be very different for them to be more involved in the process. Does that makes sense?”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My hon. Friend makes a powerful point. I certainly have not heard anyone try to diminish the experience of suicidal people. We probably all have our own stories of loved ones who we have either lost to suicide—I know that I do—or who had very severe mental health issues. The point I would make is that the families I have met who have lost loved ones through assisted dying or a harrowing terminal-illness death have said that they desperately wanted to live. That is the distinction I would make, but I appreciate that my hon. Friend is absolutely right that people with suicidal tendencies and ideation also want to live—they just do not feel they have a choice. It is a very delicate debate to have, but please be assured of my sensitivities to it.”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Clause 18(7) states that “the final act” of self-administering the substance “must be taken by the person to whom the substance has been provided.” That is very clear. The hon. Member for Solihull West and Shirley, with his medical background and expertise, has been clear and helpful on this point: it is a question of passive versus active. We have to be clear that the patient must have an active role in self-administration.”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Minister has covered my amendments 497 and 498 very clearly, so I will not speak to them. I am happy to support amendment 462, tabled by the hon. Member for East Wiltshire, about which we had a conversation this morning. I only make the observation that there is already a requirement in clause 18(4)(b) that, at the time the approved substance is provided, the co-ordinating doctor must be satisfied that the person has “a clear, settled and informed wish to end their own life”. Nevertheless, I am happy to support the amendment, because the hon. Member made a very valuable point this morning. I cannot support amendment 463, however. The Bill states that the patient must self-administer the drugs.”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Member for Reigate about medical profession levels, which we discussed this morning. I also agree with the Minister’s comments about the concept of an independent witness, and with the comments from the hon. Member for Solihull West and Shirley about the concept of additional assistance. On that basis, I will not be supporting the amendments.”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I completely understand where these amendments are coming from. In many jurisdictions where assisted dying laws are in place, this would be an accepted part of the process. However, as I have said repeatedly, our Bill stands in its own right, and its safeguards are stronger than those anywhere else in the world. One of those safeguards is that the line cannot be crossed between a person shortening their own death by administering the drugs themselves and by having another person—in this case the doctor—do it for them. While I am hugely sympathetic to the argument, that is a line that I do not believe the Bill should cross. I concur with the comments of my hon. Friend the Member for Bradford West about Second Reading and what the House voted for, and with those of the hon.”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am not aware of the situation in America, but is the hon. Gentleman not reassured that the evidence from Dignitas, which we all now have access to, says that there have been “no cases of failure at Dignitas using this medication”?”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In response to the intervention of my hon. Friend the Member for Bradford West, the evidence from Dignitas is really clear: there have been no cases of failure when using this medication.”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My hon. Friend is referring to Oregon. Obviously every jurisdiction has its own methodology when it comes to assisted dying. Is he reassured somewhat by the evidence from Dignitas that for not one person did the procedure fail? A survey from Victoria in Australia showed that 1,076 deaths from the self-administration process took place, and 86% of patients died within one hour. There are different models, and it is important to look more broadly at this if we can.”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“On the hon. Member for Richmond Park’s point, which a couple of people have made, I do not think anyone is saying that this is not a new situation—of course it is, as we are all aware. My hon. Friend the Member for Stroud’s point was that a doctor being with a patient who is dying is not a new situation. That is the important distinction.”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I can help my hon. Friend out on this point. There is an expectation in the jurisdictions where assisted dying happens that it happens in different locations, very much centred around the patient’s wishes, which is the approach we should take.”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“To try to tie this together, I should say that there seems to be consensus that something has to be recorded in the event of complications. It feels to me as though what the Government are saying is that this is not the best crafted way of doing that—that is the worst sentence ever; I apologise. We have to look at the best way of achieving the intention of a number of amendments. I am looking at amendment 430, which I think achieves the objective. This feels as though it is a drafting issue, rather than necessarily a policy issue. I might be wrong.”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“As a matter of clarity, although I appreciate the power that the Minister has just given me, which amendments we vote for is actually the job of the Bill Committee—rather than just my job, I would hope.”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We need the Bill to show that this has been considered, and the logical place for that would be clause 30, on codes of practice. I am happy to support that amendment when the time comes to vote on it.”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I thank colleagues for a thorough discussion of a group of interesting and important amendments. Amendment 429, tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Bexleyheath and Crayford, would require the doctor to remain in the same room as the person. I respectfully disagree with my hon. Friend on that point. If a person is literally in the last few minutes and moments of their life, it should be up to them to decide who is in the room with them. In some cases, that might be the doctor, but I suspect that in many cases it would be loved ones and close family members. We have had a thorough discussion of the range of amendments that look at how we deal with complications. My view is that amendment 430 would do what needs to be done.”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I believe that amendment 447, tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for York Central, would change the “may” to a “must”. I am minded to support it for that very reason. Amendment 532, tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Ipswich, comes from a good place as is meant to be a way of trying to help the doctor, but I worry, as medical colleagues have commented during our deliberations, that it could create more of a problem for the doctor in that it would remove flexibility and the use of their clinical judgment and expertise. It always worries me when we are considering putting that level of detail in the Bill.”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Friend the Member for Ipswich to new clause 8—the duty to consult—bearing in mind that there will be a long period of consultation before the Bill, if it passes, is enacted. The Minister referred to amendment 255, which I think will fall as it refers to a schedule that has been removed from the Bill.”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The challenge would be in whether the co-ordinating doctor would be able to take actions that were not listed. I worry that a list would be quite restrictive. Amendment 430, which would look at the code of practice, would achieve something in a less restrictive way, which is why I am minded to support it. We have had a really interesting discussion about amendment 533, and we will probably come further down the line to discuss where patients should have the choice to have an assisted death. I am not entirely sure how the amendment would work, which is why I am not minded to support it. I am slightly concerned about the terminology and am not sure what the definition of “disadvantaged and marginalised communities” would be for the purposes of the amendment. I refer my hon.”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“However, I also take on board the fact that the word “consultation” does some heavy lifting, and I think that is an important point, so I am happy to support amendment 408. I have mentioned already in response to my hon. Friend the Member for Bradford West that I am happy to support amendment 22, for the reasons I have given previously in relation to similar amendments.”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Clause 19 applies when the co-ordinating doctor may not be available to provide assistance. They may be out of the country or unavailable due to other personal circumstances, as the hon. Member for Richmond Park articulated beautifully—I associate myself with her comments. Of course the doctor who steps in has to be trained appropriately, and if they are not satisfied of all the matters mentioned in clause 18(4), they must immediately notify the co-ordinating doctor. That is what my amendments 210 and 499 cover. On amendment 408 in the name of my hon. Friend the Member for Broxtowe, who sadly is not with us today, it could be argued—and I take on board the comments by the hon. Member for Solihull West and Shirley—that it is unnecessary because it would be common practice by practitioners to consult.”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My view is that this is very clearly a matter for the Secretary of State, but with expert clinical and medical guidance. These are the people who should be making the decisions about such drugs. The evidence about this type of medication exists. As part of the commencement period and the consultation period, I anticipate there will be wide consultation about the drugs that are available. I think it is best left with the Secretary of State, so I would leave the clause unamended.”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I beg to move amendment 379, in clause 21, page 14, line 10, at end insert— “(3A) The coordinating doctor must, as soon as practicable, give a copy of the final statement to the Commissioner.” This amendment requires the coordinating doctor to give the Commissioner a copy of a final statement.”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Amendment 379 would ensure that the co-ordinating doctor provides the commissioner with a copy of their final statement in cases in which the person has successfully been provided with assistance to end their life in accordance with the Bill. That is an important part of the reporting procedures and of the role of the commissioner. If agreed to, the amendment will ensure a robust recording and monitoring process for assisted dying. Amendment 500 provides that regulations about the form of the final statement must make the provision mentioned in paragraphs (a) to (i) of proposed new subsection (3A). It builds on my amendment 214, which would amend subsection (3)(a) to require that the form of the final statement must be set out in “regulations made by the Secretary of State”. This is another way of ensuring robust and thorough reporting.”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I do not think that anyone has ruled out discussing complications. Clause 9 makes it clear that the doctor has a very clear discussion with the patient about what will happen if they proceed with an assisted death.”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Amendment made: 500, in clause 21, page 14, line 10, at end insert— “(3A) Regulations under subsection (3)(a) must provide that a final statement contains the following information— (a) the person’s full name and last permanent address; (b) the person’s NHS number; (c) the name and address of the person’s GP practice (at the time of death); (d) the coordinating doctor’s full name and work address; (e) the date of each of the following— (i) the first declaration; (ii) the report about the first assessment of the person; (iii) the report about the second assessment of the person; (iv) the certificate of eligibility; (v) the second declaration; (vi) the statement under section 13(5); (f) details of the illness or disease which caused the person to be terminally ill (within the meaning of this Act); (g) the approved substance provided; (h) the date and time of death; (i) the time between use of the approved substance and death.”— (Kim Leadbeater.) This amendment provides that regulations about the form of a final statement must make the provision mentioned in paragraphs (a) to (i).”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I have nothing to add other than to respond to the fair point made by the hon. Member for East Wiltshire about complications. The doctor does have to record the final statement in the medical records, and I am confident that they would also record any complications in the medical records. Similarly, we have talked about the code of practice with regard to complications, so there is scope to include what would happen in those instances there. It is, however, a fair point, and it could be something to look at amending on Report, if the hon. Gentleman wants it to be in the Bill. Amendment 379 agreed to.”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I beg to move amendment 380, in clause 22, page 14, line 25, at end insert— “(1A) The coordinating doctor must, as soon as practicable, notify the Commissioner that this has happened.” This amendment requires the coordinating doctor to notify the Commissioner of a matter mentioned in subsection (1).”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The amendment would require that if a person has decided not to take the substance or the procedure has failed, the co-ordinating doctor must, as soon as is practicable, notify the commissioner of that. It is fairly straightforward.”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I have nothing to add, other than to say that the complications that have been referred to many times today would be covered by the code of practice that we will introduce by agreeing to amendment 430. Amendment 380 agreed to. Amendment proposed : 440, in clause 22, page 14, line 34, at end insert— “(4) For the purposes of subsections (2) and (3)(b), the information recorded must include— (a) any interventions made by a medical practitioner in response to the procedure failing, and (b) the timing of those interventions.” — (Sean Woodcock.) This amendment would specify certain information to be recorded under section 22 when the procedure fails. Question put, That the amendment be made.”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The hon. Member is making an important point. I would like to get it on the record that I agree with him: there should be no duty on any person to take part in the Bill’s provisions if they choose not to, for whatever reason. I will struggle to support his amendment because there are other issues with it, but on that principle I wholeheartedly agree, and I would be happy to work with him in sorting it out, before Report, to that effect.”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am just trying to imagine what this would look like in reality. My own grandparents, for example, ended their days in a care home, and that was their home—that was where they lived, that was their address, and they paid to live there. If they had had a terminal diagnosis and had wanted to end their days in their home, having lived there for however long it was—four or five years—it would have felt incredibly cruel to expect them to go somewhere else to do something that was legal.”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If my hon. Friend will give way, in response to the point made by the hon. Gentleman, the drafting of “directly or indirectly” does worry me—”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am speaking to my hon. Friend. The point she raised about “directly” and “indirectly” is a very good one, and subsection (1A) says “In particular”, which is not exclusive. That lack of clarity and certainty concerns me; does she agree?”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“This is a very interesting point. I am slightly concerned about the equality and human rights issues in terms of the patients and terminally ill people, as well as the staff—that relates to the point that the right hon. Member for North West Hampshire just made. I do not know whether the hon. Member has done any research into gay marriage and whether there were similar issues there, because I imagine that when that was brought into law, there may have been similar issues. Does the hon. Member know how that was addressed?”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I think it is fair to say that the evidence from New Zealand is mixed. One family said that the final few precious hours of their mum’s life were mostly filled with stress and distress, as they had to scurry around to move her out of her so-called home. Does the hon. Lady agree that there are different views and opinions about the New Zealand model?”
House of Commons18 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The hon. Member is absolutely right that we are here to ask questions, and I appreciate those questions being asked. On what happens earlier in the process, I hope she is reassured by the fact that we will now have compulsory referral to a psychiatrist if there is a doubt about capacity, and we have specified in the Bill doctors consulting other health and social care professionals, to provide for a holistic approach earlier in the process.”
House of Commons12 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The other point I would reiterate is that none of that stops happening. We have heard from professionals and experts that that happens. Someone who has cancer will have a multidisciplinary team around them as part of their natural treatment process. Nothing in the Bill stops that happening.”
House of Commons12 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Is the hon. Lady reassured by the fact that, under the Bill, coercion becomes a criminal offence with a serious prison sentence? If any family members are in any doubt as to whether coercion is taking place, it is straightforward: they go to the police.”
House of Commons12 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The hon. Lady mentioned a few moments ago that the family would make such an appeal only if there was new information, but her amendment does not say that, and it has no explanatory statement. Could she clarify what she meant?”
House of Commons12 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I might have misheard, but I believe the hon. Member asked what happens when a patient asks for assisted death not as a result of illness. If that was the case, then they would not fall under the criteria of the Bill.”
House of Commons12 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I am interested in exploring the characterisation of the two sides referred to, because this is not about two sides. This is about an individual patient with a terminal illness. I am just interested in how we can explore that a little further.”
House of Commons12 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The quick answer is that there would be an injunction. I hope my hon. Friend will also be reassured that the panel is coming towards the end of this very long process. In the situation he describes, the patient would have gone through all the other stages with the doctor. I imagine in that situation, in a psychiatric referral, the doctor would have said, “Would you consider speaking to your next of kin?” There are a lot of other stages prior to getting to this point, which I hope provides some reassurance.”
House of Commons12 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I will stand corrected if this is not true, but my understanding is that Hansard will show a very different story. I do not think that 60 people got up and said on record that this element was why they were voting for the Bill.”
House of Commons12 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I understand the hon. Member’s framing of this and it might very well be his perspective, but there were 650 MPs who voted on Second Reading that day, so I think it is unfair to represent colleagues who did not have the view that this is the central component of the Bill. There are lots of other components to the Bill that colleagues have certainly spoken to me about, and it is important to acknowledge that.”
House of Commons12 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The hon. Gentleman is making a point that we hopefully all agree with. The job of the Committee is to take evidence and look at ways of improving the Bill on that basis. This is a really good example of where we have actually done our job and done it very, very well.”
House of Commons12 March 2025Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗