Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: Amendment 24
213
Ayes
—
266
Noes
Defeated
171 did not vote
Analysis
Commons
Commons
**What happened:** The House of Commons voted on Amendment 24 to the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill on 20 June 2025, defeating it by 266 votes to 213. The amendment proposed additional safeguards or restrictions to the assisted dying framework set out in the Bill, and its defeat means the original framework remained intact on this point as the Bill proceeded through its final Commons stages. **Why it matters:** The defeat of Amendment 24 means that the particular additional safeguard or restriction it sought to introduce will not be incorporated into the Bill as it progresses to the House of Lords. The Bill, which would create a legal framework allowing terminally ill adults in England and Wales to request assistance to end their lives, continues to advance without this modification. Those who supported the amendment argued the Bill required stronger protections; those who voted against believed the existing framework was sufficient or that additional restrictions would undermine access for eligible patients. **The politics:** This was a free vote, with MPs voting according to conscience rather than party whip, and the division cut sharply across party lines. Labour MPs split 110 in favour and 171 against, while Conservatives divided 58 in favour and 15 against, reflecting the broad cross-party coalitions that have characterised every vote on this Bill. The Liberal Democrats voted heavily against the amendment, 51 to 11. Smaller parties including the DUP, Reform UK, and the Ulster Unionist Party sided with the Ayes, while the Greens and Plaid Cymru voted unanimously against. The same day saw multiple other amendments voted on, with the Bill ultimately passing Third Reading by 314 votes to 291.
Voting Aye meant
Support adding a safeguard to prevent voluntary stopping of eating and drinking (VSED) from being used as a route to qualify for assisted dying under the bill
Voting No meant
Oppose this restriction, preferring to keep the bill's terminal illness definition as drafted without this additional exclusion
479 voting MPs. Each dot is one vote; left-to-right by party. Grey dots in the centre are the 171 who did not vote.
Aye
No
Absent
Labour PartyWhipped No
110
171
81
Conservative and Unionist PartyWhipped Aye
58
15
43
Liberal DemocratsWhipped No
11
51
10
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped No
12
18
12
Independent
8
2
3
Scottish National Party
0
0
9
Reform UKWhipped Aye
6
1
1
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist PartyWhipped Aye
5
0
—
Green Party of England and WalesWhipped No
0
4
—
Plaid CymruWhipped No
0
4
—
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