UK Parliament / Open data

Assisted Dying for the Terminally Ill Bill [HL]

I should explain what I mean by tradition—something that has happened consistently since 1998. When 105 Private Member’s Bills have gone through the House without a Division being called, that seems to me to be a sort of tradition. I have a letter from the Clerk of the Parliaments, which I have temporarily mislaid, which states that it is very uncommon for it to happen. If it did not happen during the passage of those 105 Bills, it seems a little uncommon that it should happen with this Bill. The previous legislation to which the procedure applied concerned the control of pigs. The House divided on that in 1998. That legislation was not a matter of national importance. With this Bill we have before us a matter of national importance that deserves further consideration. Although there are differences between me and the noble and learned Lord, Lord Mackay, on the unanimous recommendation of our committee, I assure your Lordships that, if I had realised when I was asked to vote for that Bill that if I dropped the major area of contention—voluntary euthanasia—this unanimous recommendation would no longer be applicable, I and every other Member who supported the Bill would not have allowed the Bill to go through a committee in which the majority of Members supported the Bill. Noble Lords will be relieved to hear that I have only two further points.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
681 c1292-3 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Back to top