Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: New Clause 16
208Ayes
261Noes
Defeated · majority 53180 did not vote
649 Members · Aye 208 · No 261 · DNV 180 · grey dots in centre are abstentions
Analysis
Commons
Commons
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. 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 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
Each row is one party. The stacked bar gives the within-party split of Aye / No / Absent; the columns on the right give the raw counts. The whip column shows the published party position — “Free vote” means the whip was formally removed for this division.
Party
Whip
Aye / No / Abs
Aye
No
Abs
Labour Party
Whipped No
103
168
90
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
60
15
41
Liberal Democrats
Whipped No
12
50
10
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
11
19
12
Independent
—
8
2
3
Scottish National Party
—
0
0
9
Reform UK
Whipped Aye
5
1
2
Sinn Féin
—
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
5
0
0
Green Party of England and Wales
Whipped No
0
3
1
Plaid Cymru
Whipped No
2
2
0
Social Democratic and Labour Party
—
0
0
2
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
—
0
0
1
Restore Britain
—
1
0
0
Speaker
—
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
—
1
0
0
Ulster Unionist Party
—
1
0
0
Your Party
—
0
0
1
Source · Hansard · UK Parliament Votes API · whip status from announced positions; “free vote” indicates the whip was formally removed
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