Division · No. 225Friday, 13 June 2025Commons Medical Ethics

Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: Amendment (b) to New Clause 14

233
Ayes
254
Noes
Defeated
164 did not vote
Analysis
Commons

**What happened:** On 13 June 2025, the House of Commons voted on Amendment (b) to New Clause 14 of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill. The amendment was defeated by 254 votes to 233, a margin of 21 votes. This was a free vote, meaning MPs were not required to follow a party line and could vote according to their own conscience and judgment. **Why it matters:** New Clause 14 relates to procedural or eligibility requirements within the assisted dying framework the Bill proposes to establish. The amendment sought to modify those requirements in a direction broadly characterised as adding further safeguards or restrictions on access. Its defeat means the clause will proceed without those modifications, leaving the existing provisions in the Bill intact on this point. The practical effect is that the Bill continues on a path favouring broader access to assisted dying for terminally ill adults, rather than the more restrictive approach the amendment would have introduced. **The politics:** This was a genuinely cross-cutting vote. Labour MPs split almost evenly, with 109 voting for the amendment and 165 against, while Conservative MPs backed it by 68 to 12. Liberal Democrats overwhelmingly opposed it, voting 48 to 14 against. The Democratic Unionist Party unanimously supported the amendment across its five voting members, and the Greens unanimously opposed it. The vote reflects a broader pattern across this Bill's passage, in which traditional party loyalties have been largely set aside in favour of personal convictions around medical ethics, patient autonomy, and safeguarding.

Voting Aye meant
Support a stronger, broader ban on advertising of assisted dying services, emphasising that advertising influences choices and that protecting vulnerable people from coercion requires tighter restrictions
Voting No meant
Prefer the existing advertising ban in the bill as drafted by Kim Leadbeater, without the additional strengthening provisions proposed in this amendment
§ 01Who voted how.487 voting members · 164 absent
Aye234No251DID NOT VOTE · 164

487 voting MPs. Each dot is one vote; left-to-right by party. Grey dots in the centre are the 164 who did not vote.

Aye
No
Absent
Labour PartyWhipped No
109
165
88
Conservative and Unionist PartyWhipped Aye
68
12
36
Liberal DemocratsWhipped No
14
48
10
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped No
17
17
8
Independent
10
2
1
Scottish National Party
0
0
9
Reform UKWhipped Aye
5
2
1
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist PartyWhipped Aye
5
0
Green Party of England and WalesWhipped No
0
4
Plaid CymruWhipped Aye
3
1
Social Democratic and Labour Party
0
0
2
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
0
0
1
Speaker
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
1
0
Ulster Unionist Party
1
0
Your Party
1
0
§ 02From the debate.6 principal speakers
Kim LeadbeaterSupportiveSpen Valley
Bill sponsor presenting amendments to improve regulatory framework, safeguards, and devolution compliance while ensuring palliative care and assisted dying work alongside each otherLabour · Voted no · Read full speech (2,870 words)
Sarah OlneyOpposedRichmond Park
Concerned that vulnerable groups (disabled people, ethnic minorities, those with mental health issues) remain insufficiently protected despite amendments; supports greater parliamentary scrutiny through affirmative procedure for statutory instrumentsLiberal Democrats · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,755 words)
Patricia FergusonQuestioningGlasgow West
Seeks clarification on devolution implications and conversations with Scottish Government regarding extension of clauses to ScotlandLabour · Voted teller_aye · Read full speech (738 words)
Jim ShannonOpposedStrangford
Questions the evidential basis for the Bill, citing case of terminal patient who exceeded prognosis; expresses concerns about protections for vulnerable groupsDemocratic Unionist Party · Voted aye · Read full speech (375 words)
Dr Jeevun SandherSupportiveLoughborough
Supports new clause 6 proposing special representative for ethnic minorities to ensure fair treatment in assisted dying accessLabour · Voted no · Read full speech (965 words)
Cat EcclesSupportiveStourbridge
As operating department practitioner, affirms that existing healthcare frameworks and safeguards in the Bill are adequate for drug managementLabour · Voted no · Read full speech (97 words)
§ 03Related divisions.Same topic · recent
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0