Kim Leadbeater has described her assisted suicide bill as ‘potentially one of the most important changes in legislation that we will ever see’. For Leadbeater and her allies, it is an attempt to make the law merciful: to give relief to those who want to control the manner of their death. But there is another, darker way to see the Leadbeater bill, and last week at the bill committee we got a glimpse of it.
The committee stage was meant to reassure the doubters. At second reading, MPs were told that if the vote – just 18 days after the bill was published – seemed rushed, there would be plenty of time for parliament to change its mind. Layla Moran, one of the bill’s supporters, said: ‘Remember you can vote aye on a bill at second reading and no at a later stage.’ Dignity in Dying, the campaign group, urged MPs to back the bill ‘so that detailed scrutiny can follow’.
The bill squeaked through and Leadbeater selected a committee which – to more cynical observers – looked like it might be designed not to scrutinise the bill, but to make things as easy as possible. Danny Kruger, the bill’s most prominent parliamentary critic, suggested nine names for the committee. Leadbeater chose just two, picking newer and less experienced MPs. And she gave herself a 14-9 majority, significantly less balanced than the Commons vote.
Until that point, Leadbeater had largely evaded criticism. Energetic and down-to-earth, she entered parliament in her mid-forties after a career in the real world as a lecturer and personal trainer. ‘I came into politics to make a difference,’ she said in an interview shortly before the first Commons vote.
Magazine articles are subscriber-only. Keep reading for just £1 a month
SUBSCRIBE TODAY- Free delivery of the magazine
- Unlimited website and app access
- Subscriber-only newsletters
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in