Assisted dying bill: This is how MPs plan to vote

Published

9 months ago

November 29, 2024

admin

The first vote on the assisted dying bill is not only hugely consequential, it’s also hugely unpredictable and even as the vote draws near it still feels like it could go either way.

MPs will debate the bill, brought forward by Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, in parliament today before they get a free vote on the legislation.

There are a few reasons why the potential outcome of the vote is difficult to predict. Firstly, the last Commons vote on this issue was back in 2015. It was also a Private Members’ Bill and a free vote, that was defeated by 331 to 119 – 199 MPs didn’t vote and one abstained.

That may seem like a useful starting point to predict future results but there has been an unprecedented turnover of MPs since then.

Politics latest: Starmer blames Tories for ‘open borders’

It was less than a decade ago but over two-thirds of those MPs from 2015 are no longer in parliament. This means there’s no voting record that can help us out this time round.

Secondly, it’s a free vote so we can’t, as we usually would, look to the political parties to work out the numbers.

Every single one of the 650 MPs must make up their minds for themselves and they have all taken a slightly different approach to the process.

Some came out straight away and declared their position publicly. Some took their time and have only decided in the last few days, putting out statements on social media platforms.

There are also those who prefer to keep it to themselves, and some who are genuinely still undecided and will be until they walk through the voting lobbies.

So, to get a sense of what could happen, at Sky News we have been monitoring declarations as well as reaching out to every MP personally.

This has given us, on the eve of the second reading, an informative but still incomplete picture.

So far we have confirmed that 181 MPs will vote for the bill, while 148 say they will vote against, and 300 are either undecided or haven’t revealed their decision.

There are also 20 MPs that won’t vote – the SNP because the changes won’t apply in Scotland, Sinn Fein who don’t sit in Westminster, and the Speaker and Deputy Speakers.

Of those who will vote but whose position is still unknown, about two-thirds are Labour MPs – a big chunk of those are brand new.

This is the deciding cohort, who just a few months into their roles will make a life-or-death decision that will influence generations to come – no pressure.

Ms Leadbeater has said she hopes parliament will “show itself at its best” by voting in favour of the bill.

In a statement on Thursday night, she said: “I hope this parliament will also be remembered for this major social reform that gives people autonomy over the end of their lives and puts right an injustice that has been left on the statute books for far too long.

“People will be looking in on parliament as it debates this important change to the law – a change that, when we most need it, could bring comfort to any one of us or to somebody we love.”

What could make the difference?

Most MPs tell us they have been poring over the legislation line-by-line and listening intently to their constituents.

But beyond that, there are external factors that will no doubt have influenced their thinking.

Public opinion will be high on the list, with the latest YouGov poll – one of many – showing an overwhelming majority (73%) of the public are in favour of a change in the law.

The other will be how Cabinet ministers vote, with many high profile and respected names, Ed Miliband and Hilary Benn among them, coming out in favour.

More controversial though are those who oppose the bill.

In particular, the Health Secretary Wes Streeting and the Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood have made the news with their views.

They will both have to take a leading role in implementing the legislation if it passes.

Mr Streeting shocked Westminster when he revealed he had changed his mind after voting for the 2015 version.

He also ruffled feathers among colleagues when he appeared to breach the etiquette around free votes, by repeatedly raising concerns around extra pressures on the NHS and making the case for improving palliative care instead.

Mr Streeting’s position and approach have made the bill’s supporters nervous that new MPs will fall in behind him.

In contrast, other big beasts – the prime minister, the chancellor and the foreign secretary – remain silent on which way they will go, aware that their opinions could sway the result.

As it stands, after all the number crunching, it looks likely that this landmark legislation will pass the second reading.

But with so many unknowns, both sides will feel that even at this late stage, it’s still impossible to call.

UK

‘I’m deprived of my UK citizenship but I’m not a convicted terrorist’

Published

11 hours ago

August 24, 2025

admin

'I'm deprived of my UK citizenship but I'm not a convicted terrorist'

Hayat Tahrir al Sham (HTS) went from a jihadist movement once aligned to al Qaeda to forming the official government of Syria.

It was a monumental transformation for them, their country and the wider Middle East.

But potentially too for British people who went to Syria – and who were stripped of their citizenship as a result, on the grounds of national security.

Tauqir Sharif, better known as Tox, went to Syria in 2012 as an aid worker. He was accused of being part of a group affiliated with al Qaeda, which he denies, and the then-home secretary Amber Rudd deprived him of his British citizenship in 2017.

“As of now, I am deprived of my UK citizenship but I’m not a convicted terrorist – and the reason for that is because we refused, we boycotted, the SIAC [Special Immigration Appeals Commission] secret courts, which don’t allow you to see any of the evidence presented against you,” he said.

“And one of the things that I always called for was, look, put me in front of a jury, let’s have an open hearing.”

HTS is still a proscribed terrorist organisation but the British government has now established relations with it.

Foreign Secretary David Lammy travelled to Damascus to meet the jihadist-turned-Syrian interim president – the man who swapped his nom de guerre of al Jolani for Ahmed al Sharaa.

If the UK government takes HTS off the terror list, what does that mean for those who lost their citizenship after being accused of being part of it?

People who joined HTS are only a subset among the scores of people who have had their citizenship revoked – a tool the UK government has been quick to use.

According to a report by the Parliamentary Joint Human Rights Committee, the UK “uses deprivation of citizenship orders more than almost any country in the world”.

The peak of that was in 2017, and mainly in relation to Syria – especially in the case of people joining Islamic State, perhaps most famously Shamima Begum.

And because people cannot be made entirely stateless, and need to have a second nationality, or be potentially eligible for one, there are worries of racism in who the orders apply to.

Countries like Pakistan and Bangladesh offer dual nationality, whereas other nations do not. In 2022, the Institute of Race Relations said “the vast majority of those deprived are Muslim men with South Asian or Middle Eastern/North African heritage”.

Legal grey areas

Sky News submitted Freedom of Information requests to the Home Office asking for a breakdown of second nationalities of those deprived of citizenship, but was refused twice on national security grounds.

The independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, Jonathan Hall KC, told Sky News there are issues around transparency.

“I do think there is a problem when you have people whose relationship with the country that they’re left with is really technical and they may never have realised that they had that citizenship before and may never gone to that country,” he said.

“Me and my predecessors have all said, owing to how frequently this power is used, it should be something that the independent reviewer should have the power to review. I asked, my predecessor asked, we’ve both been told no, so I agree there’s a lack of transparency.”

No automatic reversal

Even if the government does remove HTS from the terror list, it would not automatically invalidate decisions to deprive people of their citizenship.

Macer Gifford gave up a career as a banker in London to join the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG) as a foreign volunteer between 2015 and 2017.

He told Sky News that decisions “made years ago in the interest of the British public have to remain”.

“We can’t sort of go through previous cases nitpicking through it, wasting time and money to bring it up to date,” he added.

“We can’t be naive because the intent to go out, the decision to go in itself is a huge decision for them. So it shows commitment when they’re there, they then, if they take an active participation in the organisations that they’ve been accused of joining, again, that involves training and perseverance and dedication to the cause.”

But those born and raised in Britain, who joined the same cause, and lost their citizenship as a result, might reasonably ask why that should remain the case.

UK

Criminals could be banned from pubs and sports grounds under new plans

Published

11 hours ago

August 24, 2025

admin

Criminals could be banned from pubs and sports grounds under new plans

Criminals face being banned from pubs, sports grounds and concerts under new government plans to give judges powers to pass tougher community sentences.

The new measures, which would apply to people in England and Wales, “should remind all offenders that, under this government, crime does not pay”, Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood said.

Offenders’ freedom could also be curtailed with limits on driving, travel bans and restriction zones confining them to specific areas, the government said.

Similar measures could also apply to prisoners let out on licence, while drug testing would be expanded to include all those released, rather than just those with a history of substance misuse.

While judges are currently able to impose limited bans for specific crimes, such as football bans for crimes committed inside a stadium on match day, the new measures would allow for such bans to be handed down for any offence.

The justice secretary said: “When criminals break society’s rules, they must be punished.

“Those serving their sentences in the community must have their freedom restricted there too.

“These new punishments should remind all offenders that, under this government, crime does not pay.

“Rightly, the public expect the government to do everything in its power to keep Britain safe, and that’s what we’re doing.”

The proposals are part of the Labour government’s efforts to tackle overcrowding in prisons.

Back in June, it emerged that prisoners were to be transferred to lower security jails in an effort to ease overcrowding, as part of a new measure quietly unveiled by the government.

Sky News reported earlier this month how the prison system was close to collapse on a number of occasions between autumn 2023 and summer 2024, according to an independent review by former chief inspector of prisons, Dame Anne Owers.

The report said there was a systemic problem which has led to recurring prison capacity crises over the last 18 years.

UK

Police separate anti-immigration and anti-racism protesters across the country

Published

1 day ago

August 23, 2025

admin

Police separate anti-immigration and anti-racism protesters across the country

Protesters have gathered across the country as groups demonstrated against asylum seeker housing and were met by anti-racism campaigners.

Demonstrations under the Abolish Asylum System slogan were held in England, Scotland and Wales, including in Bristol, Exeter, Tamworth, Cannock, Aberdeen, Mold, Perth, Nuneaton, Liverpool, Wakefield, Newcastle, Horley and Canary Wharf.

Counter-protests were also organised by campaign group Stand Up to Racism.

In Bristol, mounted police separated the two groups in the Castle Park, with officers scuffling with protesters.

Police kept around 200 anti-immigration protesters draped in English flags away from roughly 50 Stand Up to Racism protesters in Horley, Surrey.

One man, wearing a West Ham United football shirt, was held by police as he yelled: “You’re not welcome here, you’re not welcome here, you’re not welcome here” at anti-racism protesters.

Anti-immigration protesters also chanted: “Tommy, Tommy, Tommy, Tommy Robinson” in support of the far-right activist, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon.

The anti-racism protesters chanted “say it loud, say it clear, refugees are welcome here” and held signs calling for solidarity and to “stop deportations”.

The Stand Up to Racism protesters were shepherded into a smaller area as they continued to chant: “No hate, no fear, refugees are welcome here”, which was met with “No they’re f****** not” from the other side of the street.

In Perth, protesters gathered outside the Radisson Hotel.

The anti-migration protesters held up signs with slogans such as “Perth is full – empty the hotels” and “get them out”.

Stand Up to Racism Scotland said it had achieved “victory” in Perth, with more than 200 gathering to oppose the Abolish Asylum System demonstration.

In Liverpool, a dispersal order was issued to try and contain the protests.

Saturday’s events come amid continued tension around the use of the hotels for asylum seekers.

Regular protests had been held outside the Bell Hotel in Epping, Essex, which started after an asylum seeker housed there was charged with sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl on 10 July.

Hadush Gerberslasie Kebatu, 38, was charged with trying to kiss a teenage girl and denies the allegations. He is due to stand trial later this month.

In the wake of those protests, Epping Forest District Council sought and won an interim High Court injunction to stop migrants from being accommodated there – a decision which the government is seeking permission to appeal.