Speeches by Kruger.

“I want to respond to a point made by the hon. Member for Stroud. It is relevant to the whole debate about whether we are talking about a medical treatment at all. He made the point, in respect of the question of a second or subsequent referral to an independent doctor, that it is appropriate in medicine to have second …”

“Will the hon. Gentleman give way?”

“The hon. Lady is absolutely right. We will address in later debates the point that insufficient attention will be given to the reasons why an application has been refused. If an application has been refused on the grounds of coercion, a future doctor will not necessarily know that that was the reason. As the hon. Lady …”

“This is a key group of amendments. I shall specifically speak to amendment 303, which would prevent a person from seeking multiple assessments from alternative doctors if a second assessment had already been undertaken. I am not sure that I will press that amendment to a vote, but it is important to explore this issue.…”

“I beg to move amendment 348, in clause 8, page 5, line 10, at end insert— “(c) inform the person’s usual or treating doctor and, where relevant, the doctor who referred the person to the independent doctor, of the outcome of the assessment.” This amendment would ensure that the independent doctor communicates the outco…”

“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship once again, Sir Roger. I am looking forward to this week’s debating. I want to draw the Committee’s attention to further evidence that has come in since the debate got under way. Since we started the Committee, we have had more than 400 pieces of evidence, so I apologis…”

“It does seem an extraordinary gap in the Bill, but I am afraid it is not unique to this Bill. In countries where assisted dying in some form is legal, there are remarkable failures to insist on the proper recording of applications that are declined or about which there are concerns. This speaks to the general cloud of …”

“On a point of order, Mrs Harris. I do not know whether this is appropriate, but was there a proposal to adjourn? I am conscious that my hon. Friend is about to make a very long speech.”

“I think the point the hon. Lady is making is that each member of the panel has a veto over the decision so, in a sense, there has to be unanimity about the approval. However, she is absolutely right that if two members disagree with one another about any other aspect of their proceedings, including who to invite to giv…”

“This conversation is very helpful, and the point the hon. Lady makes is absolutely right. If we are going to rely on JR as a sort of appeal process, we need to make it clear how that would work. Would there be legal aid? How quickly could these things be done? I think that that needs to be built in. Does she agree?”

“I was making the point that there is surely some value in what the hon. Gentleman describes as an adversarial process, in which the decision maker is required to consider whether there are circumstances that the applicant is not presenting.”

“The hon. Gentleman is making a very good speech in defence of the change, but could he help me understand something? He said that he supported the previous proposal, involving a High Court judge; he is now suggesting that it would be completely inappropriate to have any sort of judicial oversight of the process. How co…”

“Does the hon. Lady agree that the intervention of the hon. Member for Sunderland Central is very helpful because it highlights the difference between a genuine judicial tribunal, as he suggests, and what is being proposed here? This is not a tribunal. It would not sit in a judicial capacity. Its members would not take …”

“This is a very important point, and I am grateful for the hon. Member for Spen Valley’s admission that this is not a judicial process. We have constantly been told that the Bill has been gold-plated with the judicial stage of the application process, but we have now heard that there is not a judicial stage. We have als…”

“Danny Kruger; we are easily confused. [Laughter.] The hon. Lady talks about the question of oaths, and it is extraordinary. Does she agree that it speaks to the confusion about whether the panels are a judicial construct at all? They have a judicial function—they exercise a judicial responsibility—but they are composed…”

“rose—”

“I have made this point before, but I will do so again: it is very welcome to have these extra professionals involved in the process. Does the hon. Lady not recognise that it would be so much more appropriate to have them involved early on, at the assessment stage? We all want it not to be just a rubber stamp, but they …”

“The hon. Lady cites James Munby, who correctly identified the problems with the High Court process as it was designed and exists in the Bill. Is she aware that he also strongly objects to the amendments? He thinks that the newly proposed scheme fails on all the same tests, and he regards it as just as unsafe as the pre…”

“Could you just repeat that? [Laughter.]”

“I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.”