France beats England and Wales to introduce assisted dying legislation

The following is an English and lightly edited version of a speech given by National Secular Society (NSS) President Keith Porteous Wood on 26 September 2026 at a press conference in Paris hosted by the NSS, Libre Pensée, and the Association Internationale de Libre Pensée.

France and England & Wales have been following a remarkably similar path over assisted dying legislation, and at almost the same time. Both countries’ elected houses of parliament (ours is called the House of Commons) passed the legislation but were thwarted by their respective upper chambers, the Sénat and the House of Lords.

Over a thousand amendments were tabled to the bill in our House of Lords. The majority of these came from a handful of mainly religiously motivated lords intent on wrecking the bill because the House of Lords would not have the time to consider them before the session ended. This was indeed what happened, and the bill fell. But even if it hadn’t, and there had been a vote, it probably would have been to reject the bill, as the Archbishop of Canterbury was vehemently opposed to it and would probably have instructed her 25 episcopal colleagues, who sit by right in the House of Lords, to vote against it.

In contrast, France was able to challenge the Sénat rejection, albeit with some concessions, by referral to the constitutional court. The United Kingdom, however, does not have an equivalent body to resolve such disputes.

The only route left to the House of Commons was to reintroduce an identical bill in a subsequent session, then employ a very rarely invoked procedure under the Parliament Acts which, while permitting the House of Lords to proffer suggested amendments, denies them the power to block the bill.

The last time this power was invoked, many years ago, was to veto the Lords’ objections to equalising the age of homosexual and heterosexual consent and, later, to force through a ban on fox hunting.

Early in a new session of parliament on 11 September, the bill was reintroduced into the House of Commons but failed by 17 votes to be passed.

In the previous session the Commons had passed the bill with an (admittedly modest) majority of 23. 43 MPs who voted for the bill last time abstained or were absent for the latest vote. Could it be a coincidence that at the time of the previous vote the Prime Minister was an atheist who supported the bill, but for the latest one we have a new Prime Minister who is a Catholic and wants to delay the legislation? He says he is not opposed in principle to assisted dying but wants (admittedly badly funded) palliative care to be improved first. But it will never be good enough, and while this is used as a delaying tactic, many more will die needlessly agonising deaths.

Another reason cited by opponents was that there was insufficient protection against coercion, for example by relatives. This seemed unreasonable given that the legislation required the assent of two doctors and of a panel that would include a social worker, senior legal figure, and a psychiatrist. This requirement is much stronger than is the case in most other countries’ assisted dying legislation.

A further frustration about the failure of the England and Wales bill is that it was much less radical than ones codified in Catholic countries, such as France, Spain, and Portugal. For example, our bill would not have allowed physicians to administer the fatal dose and denied assisted deaths to those with insufferable motor-neurone type diseases, unless within six months of death. Those accompanying loved ones abroad to an assisted death would still risk criminal prosecution as they do now.

I should add that, earlier this year, the unicameral Scottish Parliament also rejected assisted dying legislation, by 69 to 57 votes.

Between 65% and 75% of the public are in favour of assisted dying legislation. So, both these parliaments defied the will of the people. One reason may be that parliamentarians tend to be more religious than the public. Both the Commons and the Lords start their business every day with Christian prayers, despite our [the NSS’s] repeated efforts to curtail them. Predictably, Protestant, Catholic and Muslim leaders fiercely attacked the bill.

Nevertheless, more positively, this year the British Isle of Man and one of the Channel Islands, Jersey, have recently passed assisted dying legislation.

There have been many attempts at legislation in my 60 years of campaigning to introduce it. Each one has faced less opposition than its predecessor. Let us hope that the next time will be successful.

Related reading

Assisted dying: will the final freedom be legalised in France? by Jean-Luc Romero-Michel

When will end-of-life care be ‘fixed’, Mr Burnham? by Colin Swinburn

Baroness Finlay, Danny Kruger, and the Defeat of the Leadbeater Assisted Dying Bill, by Colin Brewer

Religious privilege and assisted dying: an unhealthy relationship, by Keith Porteous Wood

The Right to Die: The Freethinker and the Assisted Dying Debate Over the Years, by Daniel James Sharp

Bishops in the Lords: Why are they still there? by Emma Park