Mailwatch(ed) Forum

Please make the negativity stop.

Labour planned in opposition how to introduce assisted dying via private member’s bill
Leaked document raises questions over amount of government control behind MP Kim Leadbeater’s bill

https://www.theguardian.com/society/202 ... mbers-bill

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Wed Dec 03, 2025 4:30 pm Please make the negativity stop.

Labour planned in opposition how to introduce assisted dying via private member’s bill
Leaked document raises questions over amount of government control behind MP Kim Leadbeater’s bill

https://www.theguardian.com/society/202 ... mbers-bill

Crerar again.

Deep down, I think that she is one of us. It's just that she is just not sure about that. I understand what it's like to be in that pickle.

The Guardian's got an odd bee in its bonnet about assisted dying. Polly Toynbee supports it, and maybe the editorial did to, but it's amplified every insignificant bit of news to make it sound bad, like when a couple of people who voted for it on the first vote changed their view.

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Wed Dec 03, 2025 4:30 pm Please make the negativity stop.

Labour planned in opposition how to introduce assisted dying via private member’s bill
Leaked document raises questions over amount of government control behind MP Kim Leadbeater’s bill

https://www.theguardian.com/society/202 ... mbers-bill

Well, even if it did, so what ? There may be a thousand other things that Labour in opposition wanted to see delivered in government, but which for whatever reason were not suitable as manifesto promises.

Private member’s bills rarely, if ever, make it onto the statute book without government support. David Steel’s abortion legislation springs to mind. It is completely normal for governments to support private member’s bills in this way.

And even if the party did consult with Kim Leadbetter about what she’d do if she was lucky enough to win the private member's bill raffle and offer advice, again, so fucking what ? Policy ideas are discussed within the party almost perpetually.

Why the fuck is this even a story ?

Abernathy wrote: ↑Wed Dec 03, 2025 11:54 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote: ↑Wed Dec 03, 2025 4:30 pm Please make the negativity stop.

Labour planned in opposition how to introduce assisted dying via private member’s bill
Leaked document raises questions over amount of government control behind MP Kim Leadbeater’s bill

https://www.theguardian.com/society/202 ... mbers-bill

Well, even if it did, so what ? There may be a thousand other things that Labour in opposition wanted to see delivered in government, but which for whatever reason were not suitable as manifesto promises.

Private member’s bills rarely, if ever, make it onto the statute book without government support. David Steel’s abortion legislation springs to mind. It is completely normal for governments to support private member’s bills in this way.

And even if the party did consult with Kim Leadbetter about what she’d do if she was lucky enough to win the private member's bill raffle and offer advice, again, so fucking what ? Policy ideas are discussed within the party almost perpetually.

Why the fuck is this even a story ?

Because it's a chance to criticise the government.

Sorry, I don't know what I did then.

As one of the good posters on The Guardian BTL said, assessed dying would seem to be "low hanging fruit" in terms of preventing unnecessary suffering. I've still not seen a convincing argument against it. In fact, like any stable of debating societies, the chance of a new argument turning up now doesn't seem to be particularly likely. Nevertheless, it seems like everybody in the House of Lords is convinced they've come up with something nobody else has thought of. Or at least, that's the generous interpretation of their behaviour. The less generous interpretation is they're pissing about.