The House of Lords has agreed to extend the consideration period for the Assisted Dying legislation following concerns that attempts to amend the bill excessively may hinder its progress.
Supporters of the bill feared it might not successfully navigate all required stages within the set timeframe. A motion was put forward in the Lords to allow more time for deliberation on the bill, which was unanimously approved after a lengthy debate.
A small group of unelected Peers submitted the majority of the 1,100 amendments, causing significant delays. Allegations of a “sweepstake” among opponents to impede progress further have surfaced, with reports of additional suggestions for amendments being circulated.
Criticism has arisen over the perceived time-wasting in the Lords, with warnings that their reputation is at risk due to delays in advancing the bill. Despite receiving approval twice in the Commons, progress in the Lords since June 2025 has been sluggish, raising concerns about meeting deadlines.
Critics have denounced the House of Lords for what they perceive as deliberate delays to the bill’s advancement. Louise Shackleton, whose husband passed away at Dignitas, labeled the tactics as undemocratic filibustering.
Lord Falconer, the Labour Peer overseeing the bill in the House of Lords, emphasized the importance of completing the bill’s stage within the current parliamentary session to prevent its failure. He highlighted the substantial public interest and the significant number of amendments under consideration.
Baroness Butler Closs echoed the need for additional time and cautioned about the potential impact on the House’s reputation. Her remarks swayed some Peers to support the motion for extended consideration.
Baroness Jay of Paddington expressed disappointment over the criticism faced by the House of Lords for perceived time wastage. In contrast, Lord Kevin Shinkwin raised concerns about the bill’s quality and argued that sufficient time had already been devoted to its review.
Advocates like Louise Shackleton stressed the bill’s significance in providing compassionate end-of-life options for terminally ill individuals. They welcomed the decision to allow more time for scrutiny, emphasizing the necessity of a fair and timely debate for the bill’s passage.
The hope is that the Lords will now focus on constructive debate, moving away from alleged procedural delays and ensuring a thorough examination of the bill.