The Legislative Council has voted in favour for the principles of the Assisted Dying Bill, after a lengthy discussion about coercion and what it could mean for the island.
Paul Craine was the only member who voted against the Bill at this stage and following an amendment by Diane Kelsey, members agreed that LegCo will hold evidence sessions as part of its deliberations.
This stage serves the purpose of outlining the underlying principles of the Bill, enabling debate around the wider subject matter and allowing members an opportunity to identify specific concerns prior to consideration of clauses.
Introducing the Bill to LegCo Peter Greenhill said: “The Bill before us is to enable certain adults who are terminally ill to be able to choose to be provided with specific assistance to end their suffering, to choose to end their own life.
“It is about choice for those who are about to die.”
Mr Craine said that he had serious concerns about the bill, especially how vulnerable people would be protected from coercion and the accuracy of diagnosis which say how long someone can last.
Rob Mercer said that the Bill did have safeguards from coercion, including a sentence of up to life imprisonment for someone trying or found to have coerced someone to end their lives.
He said that those safeguards could also be strengthened if members wanted to do that.
Tanya August-Hanson said that she believed the domestic abuse legislation introduced during the last administration would cover many of these areas.
Bill Henderson spoke to voice his support for the legislation, saying: “In the round, people should have the right to determine their own destinations.”
Despite this, Mr Craine said: “For me the issue of coercion is not resolved by the conversation we’ve had it here, it still troubles.”
Centuries
Kerry Sharpe said the Bill was the “most significant piece of primary legislation which the branches have dealt with for many centuries” and said she had both followed the Keys debate and considered wider evidence.
She added: “I do believe it is most people, if you were to stop them in the street and ask them about this bill, most people would say that if they were terminally ill and in insufferable pain, they would like the option to have an assisted death.
“I also believe that most people, and again, I do believe it is the majority of people, if they were watching their loved one dying in insufferable pain, and there was nothing more that could be done, most people would like their loved one to have the option of an assisted death.”
Mr Henderson added: “I’ve looked after and nursed and including members of my own family who have died and as a consequence of long term illness, and I feel exactly the same as Mrs Sharpe has indicated that, in actual fact, why should people not have the choice under those horrific circumstances to access assisted dying?
Evidence
The Bill will now advance to the clauses stage where members will also be able to move amendments and propose new clauses.
Explaining her amendment to take evidence, Ms Kelsey explained she does not want to go over old ground, but instead wants to look at the bills currently before the UK’s parliament.
She said: “My proposal would be to specifically concern ourselves with the differences between both of the proposed bills currently passing through the UK Parliament and the Bill which has been brought to legislative council by my colleague today.
“I am not proposing a re-examination of the principles or the setting up of another committee, but an evidence stage which would involve us looking at the clauses of the current UK bills, subject to the availability of the second bill, which is going through the Commons, which is still being drafted, and the possible possibility of asking questions of one or both of those movers of the private members bills in the UK, together with taking evidence from the private member from our own house of keys, to ensure that we better understand the differences in approach.”
Mr Greenhill was the only member to vote against this approach.
4 Comments