Diane Abbott: ‘Leadbeater Bill is pernicious, mishandled and deeply flawed’

Kim Leadbeater’s assisted suicide Bill “is one of the most pernicious pieces of draft legislation to come before Parliament in recent memory”, the Mother of the House has said.

Writing in The House Magazine, Diane Abbott warned that the backbencher’s proposals have been “blatantly mishandled”, and branded its content “deeply flawed”.

The Committee tasked with scrutinising the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill has been widely criticised for being unfairly stacked with supporters of assisted suicide and for excluding key opponents from presenting evidence in person.

‘Denied a voice’

The veteran MP accused Leadbeater of using “underhand and anti-democratic measures” in the selection of witnesses to appear before her Committee.

While parading Australian supporters of a change in the law, Abbott wrote, “campaigners against the bill, including key groups advocating for disabled people, are effectively denied a voice”.

one of the most pernicious pieces of draft legislation to come before Parliament in recent memory

“Crucially,” she added, “there is not a single campaign or institution representing disabled people that supports this bill.

“Experience tells them they are last in line for resources, or even for human decency. The operation of similar legislation elsewhere fills them with dread.”

Scathing

She concluded: “The authors of the bill seem to have no regard or understanding of the problems already faced by disabled people. They have a dismissive attitude towards their concerns.

there is not a single campaign or institution representing disabled people that supports this bill

“A bill purporting to give people choice will deny the vulnerable the most important choice of all.”

In her scathing article, Abbott also expressed dismay at the removal of one of the purported ‘key safeguards’ of the Bill, the role of the High Court judge in the process.

She explained: “We are now told that this is unfeasible, and that it would further clog up the courts. Replacing judges with a ‘panel of experts’ is a joke in bad taste.”