Esther Rantzen Accuses Lords of Sabotaging Assisted Dying Bill as Legislation Looks Set to Fail
esther rantzen has accused peers of "absolute blatant sabotage" as the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill appears almost certain to fall after the government decided not to allocate extra sitting days in the House of Lords. The refusal to grant more Lords debate time, combined with parliamentary rules on Private Members' Bills and a looming King's Speech deadline, has put the landmark assisted dying legislation on course to miss the deadline and fall.
Esther Rantzen and the sabotage accusation
Dame Esther Rantzen publicly criticised "religious people" and "lobbyists" and blamed peers opposed to the law change for deliberate obstruction. esther rantzen's intervention adds a high-profile campaign voice to the growing sense of urgency among backers of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, which would have legalised assisted dying in England and Wales under certain conditions.
Why the assisted dying bill is set to fall
Senior parliamentary briefings indicate the government will not give the bill additional sitting days in the Lords, a decision that makes its passage before the King's Speech in May extremely unlikely. The bill is currently in the Lords and, as a Private Members' Bill, can only be taken on Fridays under existing rules. With only five Fridays remaining, supporters say there is insufficient time for it to complete the legislative process; if it does not pass before the King's Speech, it will fall and the process would need to start again.
Parliamentary mechanics and the King's Speech deadline
Lawmakers and campaigners point to procedural constraints as the immediate hurdle. The government chief whip in the Lords, Roy Kennedy, told a parliamentary committee (a Labour body of MPs and peers) that no additional sitting days would be granted. That refusal, campaigners argue, effectively signals a decision not to facilitate the bill's passage during the current session.
Families urging change: the case of Noah and his mother
Shelley Herniman, who lives in Chepstow with her son Noah and his father, has become a public supporter of an assisted dying law after witnessing her son's prolonged suffering. Noah is 19 and was diagnosed with an inoperable brain tumour. He underwent 74 weeks of chemotherapy; at age 15 he weighed 52kg (115lbs) and needed feeding tubes and a wheelchair. He had been expected to face a further 80 weeks of treatment, but "his body wouldn't allow it. "
Shelley said conversations with her son were ones "no parent should have" and that she had initially been firmly against his wish for an assisted death. After researching options and seeing the toll of treatment, she changed her mind and supports legal change to avoid her son being forced to leave home to end his life abroad. Noah has said he wants "to be able to have a quick and dignified death. " Campaigners note that if the UK Parliament passes the legislation it would apply in both England and Wales because changes to suicide law are not devolved.
Political reactions and possible next steps
The parliamentary debate has sparked sharp reactions across the political spectrum. One Conservative peer described claims of deliberate delay as "just factually complete nonsense. " The Liberal Democrat leader, who previously voted against changing the law, called the situation "appalling. " A doctor involved in shaping the legislation accused a small group of unelected peers—many of whom were rejected at the ballot box at the last election—of using archaic filibustering tactics to frustrate progress.
A Conservative MP argued the issue is a matter of principle and said peers are entitled to oppose the bill but should not deliberately frustrate its progress by talking at length. A number of MPs, including a Liberal Democrat MP named in discussions, are being asked whether they will consider bringing assisted dying back as a Private Members' Bill in the next parliamentary session. Separately, campaign commentary has noted that assisted dying could be offered by non-NHS providers if devolved bodies reject related measures, and that some politicians argue the government has a duty to help pass the bill.
With procedural time dwindling and emotions high on both sides, supporters and opponents are left considering whether the coming weeks will produce compromise, a fresh private members' attempt in the next session, or the effective end of this legislative effort until the process is restarted.
