A new poll has suggested that 70 per cent of people in Britain support the right of the House of Lords to reject a controversial assisted suicide bill.
Traditionally, the House of Lords does not reject government legislation if it was part of the ruling party’s election manifesto. However, neither of those conditions apply in the case of the assisted suicide bill.
It was proposed as a Private Member's Bill by Labour MP Kim Leadbeater and was not a part of Labour’s election manifesto.
The Labour government is itself divided on the issue, with Prime Minister Keir Starmer supporting the bill and health minister Wes Streeting opposing it.
Streeting has argued that the NHS does not have a budget for what would effectively be an entirely new health service and has raised concerns that the lack of funding for proper palliative care could lead to patients being offered the supposed 'choice' of poor end of life care or a quick death.
A poll by Whitestone Insight of over 2,000 people in Britain found that 70 per cent believe the Lords has every right to block the legislation. The figures also show that only a fifth of people believe the Lords should not block the Bill.
Lord Falconer, who has campaigned for decades in support of assisted suicide and has on many occasions voted against bills passed by the House of Commons, has on this issue taken the view that the job of the Lords is to rubber stamp the Commons.
Asked by the BBC if the Lords' responsibility is to "ultimately uphold something that the directly elected members of the Commons have decided to go ahead with", Falconer replied, “That’s correct.”
Opponents of the Bill have welcomed the apparent size of public support for the right of the Lords to vote it down.
Baroness Grey-Thompson, the former Paralympian said, "Despite attempts to suggest otherwise, it seems the public are aware and support the ability of the Lords to reject this Bill should we think it necessary.
"The Bill is not a Government Bill and did not appear in any manifesto at the last election, so the Salisbury Convention does not apply” reports the Independent.
She added, “The most vulnerable in our society are entitled to our unwavering protection and the best quality care - something not provided by this Bill. If this is not possible within the confines of the Bill, we will not hesitate to say so."
