TRUSTPOLITICS
L

Lord McCrea of Magherafelt and Cookstown (DUP)

Speaking in the House of Lords on 6 February 2026

Debate

Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

Contribution

My Lords, I support Amendments 89, 91, 92, 101 and 103. Surely we need to demonstrate that what we term safeguards in the Bill against voluntarily becoming terminally ill are adequate and do not allow for voluntary acts to accelerate the timeline or even to create eligibility for assisted suicide. There seems to be a lack of clarity between terminal illness and eating disorders or voluntary action, which could undermine the very structure of the Bill itself. Does the noble and learned Lord, Lord Falconer, in his Amendment 87, not row back on Kim Leadbeater’s previous amendment in the Commons? It seems that this amendment is significantly narrower. Can a suicidal person, dependent upon insulin or dialysis to remain alive, refuse that treatment and become eligible under the Bill? However, if he believes that cases of voluntarily withdrawing life-sustaining treatment such as insulin to voluntarily induce a terminal illness should not be eligible under the Bill, why does he oppose amendments that would close that loophole?
← Previous speaker
In this debate
Next speaker →
In this debate

More from Lord McCrea of Magherafelt and Cookstown (DUP)

Other recent Hansard contributions by the same speaker.

About Hansard

Hansard is the official verbatim record of proceedings in the UK Parliament. Every word spoken in the Commons and Lords is recorded and published — this page is a single contribution from that record.

Partner sites