Mims Davies MP said:
Today I have voted against the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill at its second reading. It was a sitting Friday debate on a new bill - a process where MPs can bring forward their own legislation. I hugely recognise that there are deeply held views on both sides of this difficult debate so I have written out my thoughts in full below around the bill and the outcome today.
I have had a very large level of correspondence about the issue of Assisted Dying - the implications and importance of this bill.
As you can imagine, in advance of the debate, there were a great many heartfelt emails from constituents detailing their thoughts and experiences from both sides of the argument. I fully accept that assisting or ‘encouraging’ suicide, assisted dying and euthanasia are all subjects on which it is entirely possible for people to hold widely different but defensible opinions and it is highly emotive due to individual circumstances.
This was proved today in the chamber and it was a reflection of the House of Commons at its best as we listened carefully to wide-ranging arguments, questions and experiences. As it affects those we are closest to, it can engender very strong feelings; coping with long term or terminal illness is distressing and difficult, both for the patient and their families. No doubt today’s debate and vote will do just this again for many.
At the same time, many constituents have written with real concerns about legislation being rushed through without the fullest possible debate and wide-ranging discussion, including on the serious issues of existing pressures on the doctors, care staff, the wider NHS and challenging state of palliative care and Hospice funding as well as our courts and the state becoming engaged in a process that sadly is difficult, upsetting and comes to us all. Death is never an easy process and, as we know, can be incredibly harrowing.
My Dad lived with long term disablement and health impacts due to an attack at work, leading us to be a family that experienced caring and, in the long term, affected my mother’s health and all our financial wellbeing. No human life is sadly immune to pain and suffering and it’s the most awful feeling as a loved one to see your loved one struggling for any reason. I know many people and their families will be watching this with great interest or, indeed, concern.
The substance of the law in this area is not a matter of party politics but of conscience, and any vote on matters such as is and should be a free one. The last time Assisted Dying was voted on in the Commons was in 2015 when the Assisted Dying Bill was debated as a Private Members’ Bill. At that time, I voted against it.
However, it is always important to wait until we have seen the full detail of the proposed Bill and debated it as presented, and to listen carefully as all issues around this are fully distinguished and debated before making any final decisions on conscience matters. Sadly, the Private Members’ Bill process somewhat limits full debate and therefore the Member in charge has rightly said she will use parliamentary process, with the help of guidance, to work to extend the scrutiny that most people on either side of this debate believe it needs.
For your interest- the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill as published is below for you to look at here and hope you will find looking at it helpful : Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill publications - Parliamentary Bills - UK Parliament
Please be assured; I was extremely mindful when I took this vote of its impact and how it may be interpreted. It is my firm commitment I took this vote very seriously and approached this second reading debate with the utmost respect and I thank all constituents again greatly for writing to me and sharing insights which I am grateful for.
You will be aware the vote was 330 votes to 275: going forward, locally around 70% of those taking their time to write to me were against the Bill; it will be different in each area I am sure. I will very much continue to engage in its passage and listen to my constituents on their views as it progresses. I would ideally like the government to afford the chamber time to both this debate and to palliative care and hospice funding. It was clear this area of care matters, whatever the outcome. We need, as well, to ensure there really are no unintended consequences arising from this legislation and the safeguards really are there and do work.
Ultimately, as presented, there were questions I could not overcome which led to my no vote on the bill today at this second reading. However, I’m aware through the debate, others have voted to move it forward with similar questions and it is right that democracy has prevailed. It will now be a matter for the committee process to respond to these challenges and I will continue to do my work on understanding and scrutinising its next changes and look at the final bill again on behalf of constituents on both sides of the debate."
