Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill: Amendment 12
223Ayes
269Noes
Defeated · majority 46154 did not vote
646 Members · Aye 223 · No 269 · DNV 154 · grey dots in centre are abstentions
Analysis
Commons
Commons
The House of Commons voted on Amendment 12 to the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill on 20 June 2025, a proposed modification described as strengthening protections within the assisted dying legislation. The amendment was defeated by 269 votes to 223, a margin of 46 votes. Amendment 12 sought to impose additional restrictions or safeguards on the framework the Bill would establish for assisted dying in England and Wales. Its defeat means the Bill continued through its parliamentary stages without those particular protections included, preserving the version of the legislation that its supporters argued struck the right balance between access and oversight. Those who backed the amendment argued the Bill without it carried insufficient protections for vulnerable people; those who voted it down believed the existing provisions were adequate or that the amendment would have unduly restricted access to the proposed service. The vote cut sharply across conventional party lines. Labour MPs were divided 113 in favour to 175 against, reflecting the conscience-vote nature of the Bill. Conservatives split 66 in favour to just 14 against, meaning a large majority of voting Tories backed the amendment. Liberal Democrats voted heavily against the amendment, 52 to 12. The Democratic Unionist Party's five voting members all backed the amendment, as did all five voting Reform UK members who supported it. The amendment's defeat sat within a busy day of divisions on the Bill, which ultimately passed its Third Reading the same day by 314 votes to 291, advancing assisted dying legislation further than it has ever progressed in Parliament.
Voting Aye meant
Support adding this safeguard to ensure continuity and completeness of the independent medical review process in assisted dying cases
Voting No meant
Oppose this amendment, either preferring the Bill as drafted or having broader concerns about the Bill's safeguards or direction
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
113
175
73
Conservative and Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
66
14
36
Liberal Democrats
Whipped No
12
52
8
Labour and Co-operative Party
Whipped No
12
18
12
Independent
—
8
2
3
Scottish National Party
—
0
0
9
Reform UK
Whipped Aye
5
2
1
Sinn Féin
—
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist Party
Whipped Aye
5
0
0
Green Party of England and Wales
Whipped No
0
4
0
Plaid Cymru
Whipped No
0
4
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