---

Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

My Lords, I shall speak to Amendment 167 in the name of my noble friend Lady Fraser of Craigmaddie. In doing so, I should make it clear that I support the other amendments in this group, and I join other noble Lords in saying how good it is to see my noble and learned friend Lady Prentis of Banbury back in her place.

My noble friend Lady Fraser outlined how comprehension and communication can be a real challenge for some people because of their disability. The amendment invites us to think differently—to view the need for clarity from their perspective, not ours. That means our accepting that what may appear to many to be an unnecessary clarification will, to others, be essential.

Whatever position one takes on either the principle of assisted dying or indeed the Bill, surely the case for making the language in the Bill as clear as possible, for both the many and the few, is overwhelming. Doing so is ultimately about meeting the anticipatory duty to make a reasonable adjustment on account of disability. It was your Lordships’ House which helped to write that duty into law when it passed the Disability Discrimination Acts of 1995 and 2005 and the Equality Act 2010. Amendment 167 therefore gives us an important opportunity to show that we, as a law-making body, honour the duty to make reasonable adjustments, just as we require by law others to abide by that duty.

I hope the noble and learned Lord will recognise our responsibility to be seen to lead by example and to ensure that the wording of the Bill is in keeping with that duty, clearly and unambiguously. I hope he will consider my noble friend’s remarks very carefully, because she speaks with considerable professional experience and authority, which should not be ignored. I hope that he will accept her amendment.