**Senedd Blocked from Sole Deciding Power over Assisted Dying Law in Wales**
The UK’s House of Commons has ruled that the Welsh Senedd will not have the exclusive authority to decide when assisted dying could become lawful within Wales, altering a key aspect of the proposed legislation. The contentious bill, which seeks to permit adults diagnosed with terminal illnesses and expected to live less than six months to access medical assistance to end their lives, has ignited passionate debate across the country and has drawn considerable public attention.
A provision introduced earlier during the legislative process would have handed the Welsh Parliament the ability to determine the timing of the legislation’s introduction in Wales. However, this element has now been removed following a vote in the Commons. The amendment, initially championed by Liberal Democrat MP Sarah Olney, would have seen the Senedd hold full commencement powers. After MPs voted 274 to 224 against maintaining that provision, the authority reverted to a shared arrangement between the UK government and the Senedd.
With criminal law, including offences related to suicide, still falling under Westminster’s remit, and health matters overseen by Cardiff Bay, the intersection of powers generated legal complexities. Presently, aiding or encouraging suicide remains strictly prohibited in both England and Wales, carrying a maximum penalty of 14 years in prison. The proposed reform would carve out a significant, tightly regulated exception for those aged 18 and over, on the grounds of terminal illness with a life expectation of six months or less.
Politically, the measure continues to divide parties and individuals across Wales. The initial draft was drawn up by Batley and Spen MP Kim Leadbeater. Cardiff’s parliamentary representatives have reflected the broad spectrum of views: Alex Barros-Curtis (Cardiff West), Anna McMorrin (Cardiff North), and Jo Stevens (Cardiff East) all voted in favour during last November’s historic Commons ballot, while Stephen Doughty (Cardiff South and Penarth) cast his vote against.
The trend continued in other Welsh constituencies. Swansea West’s Torsten Bell backed the bill, while Carolyn Harris (Neath and Swansea East) did not record a vote. Further east, Newport’s MPs Ruth Jones (Newport West and Islwyn) and Jessica Morden (Newport East) both voted to reject the bill. Across north and mid Wales, a varied response emerged: Bridgend’s Chris Emore, Ceredigion Preseli’s Ben Lake, and Wrexham’s Andrew Ranger joined supporters, with Ann Davies (Caerfyrddin), among others, dissenting.
The removal of the Senedd’s ability to veto or postpone the law’s implementation has generated renewed discussions over the devolution settlement’s limits, as the division between health and criminal justice responsibilities becomes sharply evident. Advocates of the revised bill contend that it “reflects that criminal law is not the Senedd’s responsibility”, aligning the administration of legal exceptions with Westminster control.
Nonetheless, the Senedd retains an important role in the legislative process. A decisive vote in Cardiff Bay, anticipated this autumn, will determine whether the Welsh Parliament consents to the legislation. The political and ethical dimensions of the debate mean that, even if operational control remains with Westminster, the future of assisted dying in Wales is far from settled.
Outside Parliament, the issue has mobilised campaigners from across the spectrum, with rallies and demonstrations taking place at both the Senedd and Westminster. Opponents express concern over the potential for coercion and the ethical implications for medical professionals, while supporters insist that the proposals offer dignity and choice to the terminally ill at the end of their lives.
The outcome of these developments will resonate not only in legislative terms but also in the hearts and minds of those most affected by end-of-life care issues in Wales. As the proposals advance to further scrutiny in the House of Lords and a crucial Senedd vote looms, the national conversation around assisted dying remains as urgent and complex as ever.