The DUP MP said,
“The need for a High Court judge to decide on assisted dying cases was trumpeted as a key safeguard by supporters of the Bill throughout the process. Kim Leadbeater herself called her plans “the strongest most robust piece of legislation on this issue in the world”, before stating “the use of a High Court judge is unique, there’s no other jurisdiction that has that extra layer of protection and safeguarding”.
It is symptomatic of the Orwellian use of language by supporters of this Bill that abandoning a key safeguard is now heralded as an improvement to the legislation. Putting in place a panel with no serving judge, KC or even any person with similar qualifications is now termed “judge plus” whilst this and other safeguards are now termed as “barriers to access”. Such comments sit alongside perhaps the most offensive and bizarre claim of all that an Assisted Dying Bill should be considered as a suicide prevention measure.
Scrutiny of the Bill has been devastating in exposing the frailty of the safeguards and the failures of the entire process. That should be of huge concern, not just to those of us who opposed the Bill from the outset, but many MPs who made it clear that their initial vote in favour was only given despite significant reservations about both the content of the Bill and the Private Members mechanism by which it was being taken through the House.”