Speeches by Francis.

“My hon. Friend knows my concerns but she knows that I will be supporting the amendment this evening. Advocates must have an understanding of the available end-of-life options and be able to communicate clearly and explain to patients the medical treatments available: palliative care, social care and assisted death. Tha…”

“I will speak to amendment 394 in my name, which provides that codes of practice may be issued on “the provision of information and support to persons with learning disabilities who are eligible to request assistance to end their own life under this Act, including the role of advocates for such persons”. I am aware that…”

“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I was also not intending to speak, but I think there are two slightly different issues here. Prior to Second Reading, the Equality and Human Rights Commission produced a briefing paper on some of the issues that have been covered in amendment 500. It also gave…”

“Too many carers of disabled people end up with physical and mental health disabilities themselves, and end up trapped in the same system as their loved ones. What more can the Secretary of State do with her colleagues in the Department of Health and Social Care and the Department for Education to end that trap?”

“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms McVey. Amendment 321 will mean that the proxy’s declaration must also include the reason why the person was unable to sign their name. That would add a vital safeguard for the person and for the proxy. In this Committee, we have consistently discussed the need to safeg…”

“I beg to move amendment 321, in clause 15, page 10, line 33, at end insert— “(d) the reason why the person was unable to sign their name.””

“I hear what my hon. Friend says, but the wording of clause 18(9) and (10) is ambiguous. Subsection (9) says that the co-ordinating doctor must remain with the person until “the person has died”, but subsection (10) says that the doctor “need not be in the same room”. I do not want to get into measuring metres, but wher…”

“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Roger. I will speak to amendments 429 and 430 in my name. During oral evidence, we discussed the issues in subsections (9) and (10) of clause 18 and whether there is a contradiction. Subsection (9) states that the co-ordinating doctor “must remain with the person” and…”

“I welcome my hon. Friend’s acceptance of the amendment, and I think she sees the point behind it. It was meant not to be awkward—I do not think I have been at all awkward during this process—but simply to state that, if there were concerns later, the reason why the proxy was required should be there in a transparent wa…”

“I pay tribute to my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh South West (Dr Arthur) for introducing the Bill and for his work in bringing about this necessary debate on rare cancers. I also pay tribute to all Members who have spoken today, but particularly to my hon. Friend the Member for Calder Valley (Josh Fenton-Glynn) …”

“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Furniss. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Harlow (Chris Vince) for raising this important issue. I know it is a passion close to his heart, and he knows it is a passion close to mine too, as a parent of a young carer—I will come to that in due course. Fewer than 1…”

“I think that is the case. As the hon. Member said yesterday, people from those professional fields—in their written evidence, particularly—asked to be included in the process, but I do not think they were asking to be included at the end of the process; I think they were asking to be included earlier.”

“I hear that. As my hon. Friend knows, I supported amendment 6, as she did, and other amendments that strengthen the Bill in that way. I accept the right to autonomy. The hon. Member for Harrogate and Knaresborough gave the example of an appeal in Spain, but I do not think the fact that a religious group was funding the…”

“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Roger. I will be speaking to new clauses 14 to 17 and 21, new schedules 1 and 2, and amendments 371 to 373, 377, 378, 381, 388, 390 and 391—although I assure you I will not speak for as long as the hon. Member for Reigate did. Yesterday, my hon. Friend the Member for …”

“I hear that. As my hon. Friend knows, yesterday when there was an amendment on individual autonomy, I voted the same way that she did. But I will put the scenarios that I put in that debate yesterday when I came to my decision. The scenario that I have always considered is: what if the person with a learning disability…”

“I accept what my hon. Friend says, but there are differences of opinion. I accept that that is a very serious matter, but I would argue that a matter of life and death is more serious, and there are processes that we know. As I said, I gave evidence under oath about the demolition of a building and whether someone had …”

“Indeed, these are complex matters and these comparisons are made. We have heard a lot about Spain, which I will briefly refer to later, but Spain has a very different legal process from us. Returning to my comments, currently an individual would not have to give evidence under oath. As I said, the matters discussed by …”

“I thank my hon. Friend for that statistic, which I was not aware of. It relates back to concerns that I have had through the process, particularly on learning disabilities and how a family member finds out during the process what processes would be open to them. In my opinion, it is unclear how the proposed panel fits …”

“Yes, I am aware of some of those submissions from those individuals. I will come to this, but clearly even some people who were in support of making changes did not recommend the ones that we have now incorporated. First, I would argue that people giving evidence to the panels should be doing so under oath. In my 20 lo…”

“I was once on a planning committee in which one member of the committee voted in favour and all the other members abstained, so the recommendation went through one to zero. Technically, given the way in which new schedule 2 reads to me, that could happen, because one member could vote in favour and two could abstain, a…”