Right To Life UK has questioned whether the government is truly neutral in the assisted suicide debate after it was announced that seven additional sittings for the debate in the House of Lords would be created.
The extra days of debate were announced by the government Chief Whip in the House of Lords in what Right to Life called a “highly irregular move”.
Originally three sitting Fridays were planned for the debate, but the announcement now means that the House will sit nearly every Friday from January to Easter next year.
Right To Life UK said that the move indicated the government was keen to create extra time for the assisted suicide bill, noting that the Lords had already been given an extra day to debate it when they were supposed to be in recess.
The move, as well as giving extra time to the question of assisted suicide, will also mean less time for other Private Members’ Bills being considered.
Catherine Robinson, Spokesperson for Right To Life UK, said, “The announcement that seven additional sitting Fridays have been created for the assisted suicide bill, while much of Westminster and the media were distracted by the Budget, is deeply troubling.
“This is a cynical attempt to slip through without scrutiny a major change to what peers had expected. The government can no longer claim to be neutral on the assisted suicide bill when it is making extra time to push through a flawed and dangerous bill.”
“The bill has been mishandled at every stage, from its late publication to the biased Commons Bill Committee, and the bill’s supporters’ recent attempts to bully opponents into rushing scrutiny.
“No amount of time given to the assisted suicide bill will make it safe. It simply is not possible to legislate against the danger of self-coercion and vulnerable people being pressured into assisted suicide.”
Alithea Williams, Public Policy Manager at the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children, also questioned the government’s decision, saying it is “hard for the Government to maintain that they are neutral on the bill, while devoting so much time to it”.
However, she added that by giving the bill more time, opponents of the controversial measure now have more time to lobby parliamentarians and ensure their voices are heard.
