Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: New Clause 16
208
Ayes
—
261
Noes
Defeated
180 did not vote
Analysis
Commons
Commons
**What happened:** On 20 June 2025, MPs voted on New Clause 16 to the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, which sought to add a new provision to the legislation governing assisted dying in England and Wales. The clause was defeated by 261 votes to 208, meaning it will not be included in the bill. The vote was one of several taken on the same day as the bill progressed through its later Commons stages. **Why it matters:** New Clause 16 would have added additional requirements or safeguards to the assisted dying framework that the bill establishes. Its defeat means the bill proceeds without that provision, keeping the legislation closer to its existing drafted form. The bill, if it ultimately becomes law, would permit terminally ill adults meeting specific criteria to seek assistance to end their lives, and the shape of its safeguards directly affects how accessible and how restricted that process would be in practice. **The politics:** The vote cut across conventional party lines, as has been characteristic of this bill throughout its passage. Conservative MPs backed the clause by a large majority (60 to 15), while Liberal Democrats opposed it heavily (50 to 12). Labour MPs split, with 168 opposing and 103 supporting. Reform UK and the DUP both voted predominantly in favour. The same day saw the bill pass its Third Reading by 314 to 291, meaning the bill advanced to the House of Lords despite this and other amendments being rejected.
Voting Aye meant
Support allowing New Clause 16 to be read a second time and considered as part of the assisted dying Bill
Voting No meant
Oppose New Clause 16 being read a second time, effectively blocking its consideration in the Bill
469 voting MPs. Each dot is one vote; left-to-right by party. Grey dots in the centre are the 180 who did not vote.
Aye
No
Absent
Labour PartyWhipped No
103
168
91
Conservative and Unionist PartyWhipped Aye
60
15
41
Liberal DemocratsWhipped No
12
50
10
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped No
11
19
12
Independent
9
2
2
Scottish National Party
0
0
9
Reform UKWhipped Aye
5
1
2
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist PartyWhipped Aye
5
0
—
Green Party of England and WalesWhipped No
0
3
1
Plaid CymruWhipped No
2
2
—
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
0
0
1
Moved Third Reading; argues the Bill is safe, compassionate, and necessary to end the injustices of the status quo; emphasizes strong safeguards and multiple capacity assessments.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (2,966 words) →
Opposes Third Reading; raises practical concerns about implementation, professional capacity, coercion risks in vulnerable communities, and loss of the promised 'gold standard' safeguards in Committee.Conservative · Voted aye · Read full speech (2,204 words) →
Supports the principle of assisted dying but opposes this Bill; warns of coercion risks, lack of coroner oversight, for-profit contractor risks, and insufficient protection for vulnerable and marginalized groups.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (777 words) →
Opposes the Bill as currently drafted; highlights failure to close the anorexia loophole and rejection of amendment 38; argues lack of expert consensus from Royal Colleges makes it unsafe.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,018 words) →
Supports the Bill; draws on personal experience of his mother's painful death from pancreatic cancer and contrasts it with a constituent's dignified assisted dying in Spain.Conservative · Voted no · Read full speech (870 words) →
Opposes the Bill; argues it lacks professional consensus, will face legal challenges, cannot be properly implemented without willing professionals, and compares unfavorably to the 1967 Abortion Act model.Liberal Democrat · Voted aye · Read full speech (1,467 words) →
Opposes the Bill; emphasizes disabled people's organizations' fears and shift from neutral to opposed stance; notes absence of disabled voices in consultation and poor accessibility of Bill materials.Labour · Voted aye · Read full speech (827 words) →
Supports the Bill; as a long-serving doctor, argues it provides essential choice to dying patients, protects vulnerable groups through panel oversight, and offers final autonomy and dignity.Unknown · Voted no · Read full speech (674 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0