Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: Second Reading
330
Ayes
—
275
Noes
Passed
42 did not vote
Analysis
Commons
Commons
Parliament voted 330 to 275 on 29 November 2024 to pass the Second Reading of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, introduced by Labour MP Kim Leadbeater. The margin of 55 votes means the Bill progresses to Committee stage, where MPs will scrutinise and potentially amend it in detail. This was a free vote, meaning MPs were not instructed by party whips and voted according to their individual conscience. The Bill would, if it eventually becomes law, allow terminally ill adults in England and Wales who have been given a prognosis of six months or fewer to live to request an assisted death. The process would require approval from two doctors and a High Court judge, with the patient required to demonstrate mental capacity and a settled wish at each stage. The legislation would affect patients, medical professionals and the courts, and would create a new criminal offence of coercion carrying a sentence of up to 14 years. The vote cut sharply across party lines rather than following them. Labour MPs split 213 in favour and 134 against, with a further 22 Labour and Co-operative MPs voting 22 to 17 in favour. The Liberal Democrats backed the Bill most strongly among larger parties, voting 61 to 11 in favour. Conservatives opposed it by 88 to 23. Reform UK split 2 to 5 against. The DUP voted unanimously against, and the Greens unanimously in favour. The vote is the first time Parliament has approved the principle of assisted dying legislation at Second Reading, advancing a debate that had stalled for a decade following a similar Bill in 2015.
Voting Aye meant
Support legalising assisted dying for terminally ill adults, giving dying people autonomy and dignity at the end of their lives under stringent criteria including checks for coercion
Voting No meant
Oppose legalising assisted dying, citing concerns about protecting vulnerable people from coercion, the adequacy of safeguards, the role of medical professionals, and the sanctity of life
605 voting MPs. Each dot is one vote; left-to-right by party. Grey dots in the centre are the 42 who did not vote.
Aye
No
Absent
Labour PartyWhipped Aye
213
134
15
Conservative and Unionist PartyWhipped No
23
88
5
Liberal DemocratsWhipped Aye
61
11
—
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped Aye
22
17
3
Independent
3
11
—
Scottish National Party
0
0
9
Reform UKWhipped No
2
5
—
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist PartyWhipped No
0
5
—
Green Party of England and WalesWhipped Aye
4
0
—
Plaid CymruWhipped Aye
3
1
—
Social Democratic and Labour Party
1
0
1
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
0
1
—
Speaker
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
0
1
—
Ulster Unionist Party
0
1
—
Your Party
0
1
—
Supports the Bill as essential to give terminally ill people choice and dignity, with robust safeguards (two doctors and a High Court judge) stronger than any other jurisdiction; argues the status quo is cruel and forces desperate measures.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (6,689 words) →
Opposes the Bill as fundamentally flawed; argues 'terminal illness' is too elastic, safeguards are inadequate, the six-month cut-off is arbitrary, the capacity test is weak, and the Bill will harm vulnerable and disabled people while eroding palliative care investment.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (4,314 words) →
Has reservations about the Bill despite not opposing assisted dying in principle; doubts the sufficiency of safeguards, warns of coercion risks and precedent from Canada, and argues palliative care should be prioritized before legislating on assisted dying.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (860 words) →
Strongly supports the Bill; changed his mind after hearing constituents' distressing end-of-life stories; emphasizes the current law forces people to die in secret and horror, and that 75% of the public backs this change.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (961 words) →
Supports the Bill; argues the current law offers no safeguards and that Parliament has a duty to legislate rather than rely on ex post facto prosecution guidelines; praises Leadbeater's measured approach.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,145 words) →
Questions the coercion safeguards; argues two clinicians cannot eliminate all risk of hidden coercion and that the six-month cut-off is arbitrary and vulnerable to legal challenge.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (243 words) →
Sympathetic but concerned about systemic coercion from financial burden; asks how the Bill ensures elderly people in care homes won't feel pressured to die to save family money.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (121 words) →
Opposed; warns that the Bill may follow the pattern of Belgium and Canada where assisted dying expanded beyond terminal illness to include dementia and children, asking whether safeguards are truly immutable.DUP · Voted no · Read full speech (98 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0