Orcadian Column, 22 May 2025
“McArthur has a reputation as a highly competitive footballer”. Not immediately relevant to Holyrood’s decision to pass the general principles of my Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) bill at Stage 1 last Tuesday, I accept. The view expressed in Glen Campbell’s generous background feature on the momentous vote for BBC Scotland’s website does, however, provide a perfect segue into paying tribute to another highly competitive footballer, Barry Hourston. Barry notched Papay’s first ever Parish Cup goal with a last-minute penalty against Sanday at the weekend, making history while prompting wild celebrations both on and off the pitch.
Wild celebrations were not the response to last Tuesday’s vote, of course, rather a profound sense of relief after two previous bills, introduced by the late Margo Macdonald, were voted down at the same stage in 2010 and 2015. At the third time of asking, though, parliament agreed to back the general principles of my bill by 70 votes to 56, a majority that took most MSPs and political commentators by surprise. So what has changed?
Well as significant as the move is, Scotland is not breaking new ground here. Over the past decade, New Zealand as well as every state in Australia have followed the lead of an increasing number of states in the US in successfully introducing assisted dying laws based on a terminal illness, mental capacity model. This has allowed us to see who accesses the option, with what conditions and at what point in their treatment. We have evidence too of how the various safeguards work in practice and how the choice of an assisted death interacts with improved palliative and social care, upon which the vast majority of people continue to rely.
Recent years have also seen a seismic shift in the medical profession. Back in 2015, the Royal Colleges of Physicians, Surgeons and GPs as well as the British Medical Association were all opposed to reform. All now take a neutral stance, reflecting the desire amongst growing numbers of their members for change or at least meaningful engagement in discussions about how a change in the law might work.
And finally, the personal testimonies have become ever more common and compelling. In my opening speech, I quoted Anni from North Uist, an MND patient who sees the choice of assisted dying as a ‘lifeline’ and release from the ‘fear and sleepless nights’. Tuesday’s debate heard many similar stories from MSPs speaking personally as well as on behalf of constituents.
Opponents too made powerful contributions, resulting in an emotional five hours of debate that showed parliament at its best. MSPs argued their case with passion, insight but also respect, doing justice to the sensitivity of the issue. At a time when public confidence in politics and politicians appears to be at a low ebb, this felt like a timely and important reminder of what political discourse can be like.
Hopefully that approach can be sustained as we move into Stage 2 and consideration of amendments by the Health Committee. Any MSP can lodge amendments and I’m determined to continue working closely with colleagues across the parties as well as the many stakeholder groups to find ways to strength and improve my bill. I’ve already indicated the age threshold will rise to 18, but other changes will be necessary in response to issues raised during the debate, and in the Health Committee’s report, to ensure the bill commands majority support when it returns for a final Stage 3 vote in the Chamber early next year.
It has taken four years to get to this point and there is a lot of hard work still to do, but that is what the public would expect with a bill of this nature. The public has also consistently shown its overwhelming support for a change in the law. Tuesday’s vote demonstrated that the political ‘mood’ has caught up at last. I am confident we can now go on and deliver the choice that is so desperately needed by a small but not insignificant number of dying Scots. When we do, we will wonder why it took so long to get there.