News

Assisted dying bill - special series #17: Peers give the Bill a Second Reading, but progress is paused for committee evidence - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 107

20 Sep 2025
©
©

The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill has cleared another key hurdle: it was given a Second Reading in the House of Lords without a formal vote. But Peers have agreed to set up a special select committee to hear evidence from Ministers, professional bodies and legal experts before the Bill goes any further. That decision pushes the detailed clause-by-clause scrutiny back to mid-November and could shape the Bill’s prospects in unexpected ways. In this episode we explore the procedural twists and political manoeuvring behind that decision.

Please help us by completing our Listener Survey. It will only take a few minutes.

To help unpick what happened and what it all means, we are joined this week by Dr Daniel Gover, Senior Lecturer in British Politics at Queen Mary University of London and an authority on Private Members’ Bills, and Matthew England from the Hansard Society, whose briefings on the Bill have tracked everything from procedure to delegated powers.

The debate at Second Reading showcased powerful speeches and some striking personal interventions. Beyond the moral arguments, Peers zeroed in on the Bill’s constitutional and procedural implications – especially the sweeping delegated powers that drew sharp criticism from the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee. Lord Falconer, the Bill’s sponsor in the Lords, signalled his support for amendments to the Bill to address some of the Committee’s concerns.

The Government’s role also came under the spotlight. Some peers bristled at the cancellation of the Lords’ recess to complete the Second Reading debate, and critics accused ministers of tilting the timetable to favour the Bill. We consider whether those claims really hold up.

The biggest twist, though, was the compromise deal negotiated between Lord Falconer and Baroness Berger to establish a temporary select committee. It will gather evidence from ministers, the medical and legal professions and the hospice sector, and publish its findings by 7 November, far earlier than originally proposed.

Crucially, the committee will not be required to recommend whether the Bill should proceed or be amended, but the evidence it collects will frame the clause-by-clause scrutiny that is now expected to begin in mid-November, with four sittings scheduled before Christmas. The committee’s membership and witness list are still to be decided, but the stage is set for a short, sharp inquiry whose findings could shape the next—and most testing—phase of this landmark legislation.

©Queen Mary University of London

Dr Daniel Gover

Dr Daniel Gover

Daniel Gover is a senior lecturer in British Politics at Queen Mary University of London. His research focuses on the UK Parliament and constitution, particularly the legislative process and Private Members' Bills. Prior to taking up a position as a lecturer, Daniel worked at the Constitution Unit at UCL and in 2017 co-authored a book with Professor Meg Russell on Parliament's influence over legislation, Legislation at Westminster: Parliamentary Actors and Influence in the Making of British Law. He also worked at Queen Mary's Mile End Institute, researching the 'English Votes for English Laws' procedure in the House of Commons.

©

Matthew England

Matthew England

Matthew is a Researcher at the Hansard Society whose work focuses on delegated legislation and parliamentary procedure. Matthew has produced several briefings for the Society on the assisted dying bill and the relevant Private Member’s Bill process in the Commons and the Lords, analysing the parliamentary stages that the Bill will need to pass through to become law. Before joining the Hansard Society, Matthew worked in the office of a Member of Parliament, focusing on scrutiny of legislation.

Dr Daniel Gover

Hansard Society

House of Lords

Please note, this transcript is automatically generated. There may consequently be minor errors and the text is not formatted according to our style guide. If you wish to reference or cite the transcript copy below, please first check against the audio version above.

Intro: [00:00:00] You are listening to Parliament Matters, a Hansard Society production supported by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust. Learn more at hansardsociety.org uk/pm.

Ruth Fox: Welcome to Parliament Matters, the podcast about the institution at the heart of our democracy, Parliament itself. I'm Ruth Fox, and this is the latest in our series of special mini pods following the detailed progress of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, the Bill to allow assisted dying in England and Wales.

The headline this week, the Bill has cleared its Second Reading in the Lords, and as we expected it passed without a formal division. But there's been a twist in the story. Peers have agreed to create a special select committee to take evidence from ministers and professional bodies on the Bill's implications.

Because of that move the next stage, the detailed clause-by-clause scrutiny and amendment of the Bill, has been pushed back to November after the special select [00:01:00] committee has reported. So what does all of this mean for the Bill's journey through the House of Lords?

Now, regular listeners will know that, uh, I'm usually joined by my partner in parliamentary podcasting, Mark D'Arcy, but not today. Mark's off. He's soaking up the sun in the south of France. Lucky him!

We weren't actually planning to hit record this week because it was a quiet parliamentary week with both Houses rising for the party conference recess.

But the House of Lords had other ideas. Peers canceled recess today to complete the Second Reading of the assisted dying Bill. And as we've had a special series exploring this Bill, we couldn't really let it pass without getting back into the studio.

So I'm here and, uh, happily for me and for you listeners, I'm not flying solo.

Joining me is Dr. Daniel Gover, Senior Lecturer in British Politics at Queen Mary University of London, and a seasoned expert in Private Members' Bills. And from the Hansard Society team, [00:02:00] Matthew England, whose analysis and insights you'll know if you've read our briefings on the assisted dying Bill, covering everything from procedure to delegated powers.

This isn't their debut. They've both been on the pod before, so it's a pleasure to say "welcome back Daniel and Matthew".

Daniel Gover: Well, thank you for having me back.

Ruth Fox: Great to have you and, uh, welcome Matthew.

Matthew England: Thank you. It's good to be back.

Ruth Fox: Great. Well, we have a lot to cover, so, I thought we should start perhaps with the debate itself.

We've had two days of debate now, and Daniel, what, what speech has stood out to you in, in the debate this week?

Daniel Gover: Well, quite a lot of the, uh, things that were said in the debate were quite similar, I think to, uh, to what was said last week in the first day of Second Reading, and in fact, that was commented on by some of the Peers in the debate. One that really stood out to me though was a speech by Lord Carey of Clifton, George Carey, former Archbishop of Canterbury, and if you didn't know much about his thinking on this issue, you would probably expect [00:03:00] him to be a, an opponent of the Bill. But in fact, he's a supporter and, an outspoken supporter of the Bill and really put this question to the Bishop's bench, to his former colleagues, uh, bishops in the Church of England.

Did they really want to be seen to stand in the way of this Bill? And indeed, did the Lords itself want to, uh, be seen to stand in the way of this Bill? And what might that say about the legitimacy of the Bishops in the Lords and indeed of the, the Chamber itself?

Subscribe to Parliament Matters

Use the links below to subscribe to the Hansard Society's Parliament Matters podcast on your preferred app, or search for 'Parliament Matters' on whichever podcasting service you use. If you are unable to find our podcast, please email us here.

News / Why MPs can’t just quit: The curious case of the Chiltern Hundreds - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 129

Why can’t MPs simply resign, and why does leaving the House of Commons still involve a medieval-sounding detour via the Chiltern Hundreds or its less glamorous cousin the Manor of Northstead? This week we unravel the history, constitutional logic and legal fudges behind this curious workaround, with some memorable resignations from the past along the way. We also assess the Government’s legislative programme as the Session heads toward its expected May close, including the striking lack of bills published for pre-legislative scrutiny. Finally, as Parliament begins the five-yearly process of renewing consent for the UK’s armed forces, we examine why an Armed Forces Bill is required and hear from Jayne Kirkham MP on how her Ten Minute Rule Bill helped extend the new Armed Forces Commissioner’s oversight to the Royal Fleet Auxiliary. Listen and subscribe: Apple Podcasts · Spotify · Acast · YouTube · Other apps · RSS

01 Feb 2026
Read more

News / Parliament Matters Bulletin: What’s coming up in Parliament this week? 2-6 February 2026

The new Lord Speaker will take over the Woolsack and the new Archbishop of Canterbury will be introduced to the House of Lords. In the Commons, Cabinet ministers John Healey, David Lammy, Liz Kendall and Emma Reynolds will face MPs’ questions, while Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood and Treasury Minister James Murray give evidence to Select Committees. MPs will decide whether to carry over the High Speed Rail (Crewe–Manchester) Bill for repurposing as the Northern Powerhouse Rail Bill and will debate legislation to abolish the two-child benefit limit. The Conservatives will choose the topic(s) for an Opposition Day debate, and there’s a backbench debate on Palestine. Peers will debate bills on prioritisation of medical training places and on Budget-related changes to National Insurance Contributions.

01 Feb 2026
Read more

News / Assisted dying bill: How could the Parliament Act be used? - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 128

As the assisted dying bill grinds through the House of Lords under the weight of more than a thousand amendments, Lord Falconer has signalled that time is running out. With the Bill unlikely to complete its Lords stages this Session, he has openly raised the possibility of using the Parliament Act to override the upper House in the next Session. In this episode we explore what that would mean, how it could work in practice, and the political choices now facing ministers and Parliament. Listen and subscribe: Apple Podcasts · Spotify · Acast · YouTube · Other apps · RSS

30 Jan 2026
Read more

News / Who really sets MPs’ pay – And why you might be wrong about it. A conversation with Richard Lloyd, chair of IPSA - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 126

What are MPs actually paid and what does the public fund to help them do their job? In this conversation with Richard Lloyd, chair of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) we explore the delicate balance between supporting MPs to do their jobs effectively and enforcing strict standards on the use of public money. We discuss how IPSA has shifted from a rule-heavy “traffic cop” to a principles-based regulator, why compliance is now very high, and the security risks and pressures facing MPs‘ offices as workloads rise and abuse becomes more common. Listen and subscribe: Apple Podcasts | Spotify | ACAST | YouTube | Other apps | RSS

21 Jan 2026
Read more

News / Is being Prime Minister an impossible job? - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 121

Why do UK Prime Ministers seem to burn out so quickly? We are joined by historian Robert Saunders to examine why the role has become so punishing in recent years. From Brexit and COVID to fractured parties, rigid governing conventions and relentless media scrutiny, the discussion explores what has gone wrong – and what kind of leadership and political culture might be needed to make the job survivable again.

23 Dec 2025
Read more