Thank you ian. If that was a superb debate in the Commons, showing what MPs are capable of given the space and time, yours was an equally superb piece doing full justice to that debate.
Interest to reflect on what you said in your book on Westminster and what can be so wrong with the Commons. This is a clue that it can be so much better.
Thank you Ian for summarising the debate. I didn’t watch it as it’s far too personal for me. But I’m so glad it was debated silently and with the care and attention it needed, rather than it being about bleating children shouting and denigrating people who disagree with them. We should have more of that and this would truly be Great Britain.
The last debate I can remember being this reasoned and reasonable was that to legalise sane sex marriage. It's a shame there are so few opportunities for several hundred MPs who are interesting and varied human beings to show their diverse life experiences and actually engage with each other, and us, meaningfully.
What would it take for this to be how all legislation is debated going forward? Possibly the most grown up I've ever seen Parliament, which for a 43 year old is shocking.
Thank you for this great piece of writing. I am out of the country at the moment and following from a distance but this result shows how badly the whip system serves us. Let all MPs vote on their consciences, on all subjects. Make them read up on the matters they vote on. Each item should have a single sheet of A4 summarising both or all sides written by an impartial person if reading the actual bill is too much to ask. Let's hope that the bill makes it all the way to the end.
"Every other expectation we have of the state is to have it extend and protect life."
This, for me, is why there is nothing to celebrate here, the quality of the debate notwithstanding. Removing the state's duty to extend and protect life is what starts us on a very dangerous journey.
Once again speechless, thank you Ian, your writing took me there to the very chamber and the solemnity of the occasion, I am grateful the bill has been passed.
Thank you for this detailed write-up. Very heartened by your report on the quality and seriousness of the debate- absolutely right in the circumstances.
Because I am disabled and don't trust the non spoonies in our society not to expand .the scope of this legislation to include non terminally ill people. Experience of the social security system... sorry disability denial system over the last 20 years under both parties leads me to believe that this is the intention of Dignity in dying the main pro bill charity which has links to both.the euthanasia and eugenics movement, Keir Starmer and many in the labour inner circle. Nothing to do with religion, just fear and self preservation motivate my opposition.
A wonderful piece of writing, Ian. Reduced me to tears.
Thank you ian. If that was a superb debate in the Commons, showing what MPs are capable of given the space and time, yours was an equally superb piece doing full justice to that debate.
Interest to reflect on what you said in your book on Westminster and what can be so wrong with the Commons. This is a clue that it can be so much better.
Thank you Ian for summarising the debate. I didn’t watch it as it’s far too personal for me. But I’m so glad it was debated silently and with the care and attention it needed, rather than it being about bleating children shouting and denigrating people who disagree with them. We should have more of that and this would truly be Great Britain.
Oh what a piece. In tears on the tube xx
The last debate I can remember being this reasoned and reasonable was that to legalise sane sex marriage. It's a shame there are so few opportunities for several hundred MPs who are interesting and varied human beings to show their diverse life experiences and actually engage with each other, and us, meaningfully.
*same...
What would it take for this to be how all legislation is debated going forward? Possibly the most grown up I've ever seen Parliament, which for a 43 year old is shocking.
Thank you for this great piece of writing. I am out of the country at the moment and following from a distance but this result shows how badly the whip system serves us. Let all MPs vote on their consciences, on all subjects. Make them read up on the matters they vote on. Each item should have a single sheet of A4 summarising both or all sides written by an impartial person if reading the actual bill is too much to ask. Let's hope that the bill makes it all the way to the end.
"Every other expectation we have of the state is to have it extend and protect life."
This, for me, is why there is nothing to celebrate here, the quality of the debate notwithstanding. Removing the state's duty to extend and protect life is what starts us on a very dangerous journey.
Beautiful writing. Thank you. *sniff*
We can but hope that other subjects can be debates in a similar way.
*debated. Oops
Once again speechless, thank you Ian, your writing took me there to the very chamber and the solemnity of the occasion, I am grateful the bill has been passed.
Great summary, thank you 🙏
As others have said, great piece.
Just to add, if you haven't read Ian's Bluesky thread live-tweeting(?) proceedings *(linked in the thread), I would highly recommend taking the time.
Just as thorough as his epic Brexit-debate threads, but replacing the (highly appropriate) abuse of idiots with (highly appropriate) solemnity.
Truly inspiring and informative post, Ian. As you say, we must dare to dream of how things could be if we are ever to realise such a reality.
Thank you for this detailed write-up. Very heartened by your report on the quality and seriousness of the debate- absolutely right in the circumstances.
Disabled people like me thrown under the bus again by Parliament.
How do you come to that conclusion?
Because I am disabled and don't trust the non spoonies in our society not to expand .the scope of this legislation to include non terminally ill people. Experience of the social security system... sorry disability denial system over the last 20 years under both parties leads me to believe that this is the intention of Dignity in dying the main pro bill charity which has links to both.the euthanasia and eugenics movement, Keir Starmer and many in the labour inner circle. Nothing to do with religion, just fear and self preservation motivate my opposition.