Numerous committee members told POLITICO the atmosphere in the room had been largely collegiate and respectful. But tensions have risen to the surface, both in the sessions and in the hothouse of social media.
“It’s really very unpleasant and, as far as I’m concerned, completely unnecessary,” said Olney of online interventions by members of the public and campaign groups. She claimed both sides of the debate had been “misrepresenting some of what’s happening” — and “making life harder for MPs.”
That was echoed by supporters, who felt the nuances of the assisted dying debate were rarely being reflected online. Bill-backer and Plaid Cymru MP Liz Saville-Roberts accused some groups of “trying to be heavy-handed and influence parliamentarians through fear. That is utterly unacceptable.”
Leading Conservative critic of the legislation Danny Kruger welcomed online coverage of the committee process as “concerns start to rise” — but warned against “extremely unpleasant and unnecessary abuse.”
‘Fine line’
Hundreds of amendments have been proposed to the bill in the name of strengthening its safeguards and preventing abuse. However, supporters of the assisted dying push have questioned whether skeptics have been simply trying to bog the legislation down in technicalities.
“Some of the amendments are from people who do not want to see the bill moving ahead, and that’s part of their function,” claimed Saville-Roberts.
“If we try and put in too many safeguards, which sounds like a sensible idea, actually, you make the whole thing unworkable,” said Labour MP Simon Opher, a support of the legislation. “There’s a really fine line between making it as safe as possible but also making it functional.”
