𝓤𝓷𝓲𝓽𝓮𝓭 𝓝𝓮𝔀𝓼

Peers who blocked the assisted dying bill risk undermining faith in democracy and fuelling public frustration that “in this country it is too difficult to get anything done”, MPs have warned. A three-hour Westminster Hall debate on Monday considered whether it was right that the House of Lords could derail legislation passed by the Commons. Opening the meeting, Labour MP Lewis Atkinson said recent events posed a wider “existential question” about British parliamentary democracy.

He added: “If, as a country, we cannot resolve different views through Parliament … then I think we are in a very troubling place.” Mr Atkinson, the MP for Sunderland Central, highlighted recent polling which found “a shift from frustration to anger among the general public … that in this country it is too difficult to get things done, a sense that our institutions are broken, a sense that action is blocked at every turn”.

Another MP warned that the behaviour of peers blocking progress “destroys our constituents’ faith in our local democracy if they feel that we’re playing games”.

Tory MP Kit Malthouse said he had “watched with horror as peers tabled 1,200 amendments”. He condemned the “pretence of scrutiny” which he said included peers encouraging colleagues to table needless amendments to cause delays.

Mr Malthouse added that it was “clear from the casual cruelty” of some that they had not understood the suffering of those affected by the current law.

However, MPs who opposed the assisted dying bill argued that it was fundamentally flawed, and urged colleagues not to “demonise the Lords for doing their job”.

Former health minister Ashley Dalton, who has stage four breast cancer, spoke passionately against the bill. She said MPs, peers and ministers must work together to uphold the integrity of Parliament because “bad legislation has truly terrible consequences”.

She added: “Parliament’s role is to pass the best possible legislation, not to vote on principle and let the detail work itself out later.” Another MP suggested there had been strong opposition among peers beyond just the small group of filibusterers.

But Mr Atkinson questioned why opponents had gone out of their way to prevent any votes if they were confident of winning. He said: “Over 16 days of debate, the will of the Lords was not tested once. There were no divisions.”

Dr Simon Opher, Labour MP for Stroud, said it was “impossible to justify” that peers who acquired their seats via religious office or political donations should be able to block the will of MPs.

He added: “In the longer term, we need to abolish this chamber and replace it with something fit for purpose.”

The debate was triggered by a 114,000-signature petition urging the Government to ensure that bills backed by MPs and the public can complete all parliamentary stages.

The petition was planned by terminally ill campaigner Nathaniel Dye, who died of bowel cancer in January aged 40. It was then adopted by his friend Sophie Blake, who lives with incurable breast cancer.

Nathaniel’s sister Becky Scott, 43, was among those watching the debate from the public gallery. She said: “Nathaniel was very passionate about assisted dying but he also had an incredible sense of justice.

“The way this campaign has been blocked and stalled by people serving their own agendas was something he struggled with.”

Sophie, 53, who watched alongside her teenage daughter Maya, said the day was bittersweet. She added: “I know how proud Nathaniel would be but he would also be furious and devastated at the betrayal of the system.

“This is not just about assisted dying, this is about democracy and what it means for the future if peers know they can block bills. When will it stop?”

The Express Give Us Our Last Rights campaign has fought to legalise assisted dying for more than four years.