The prime minister has said he will not put pressure on Labour MPs over their votes on whether to legalise assisted dying.
Cabinet ministers are increasingly divided in public over the issue, which will be voted on in the House of Commons at the end of next week.
MPs are being granted a free vote, which means their parties are not telling them how to vote.
Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson is the latest senior minister to set out her opposition to a change in the law, alongside Deputy PM Angela Rayner, Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood, Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds and Health Secretary Wes Streeting.
Cabinet supporters for a change in the law include Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall, Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy and Energy Secretary Ed Miliband.
The Cabinet Secretary, Simon Case, the country’s most senior civil servant, had told all ministers, external they should “not take part in the public debate.”
Mr Streeting’s repeated public opposition, including asking officials to examine the costs to the NHS of implementing any change in the law, has provoked private and public irritation from some of his Labour colleagues.
One cabinet source said it was “ridiculous” to expect the health secretary not to give his view.
On Friday morning, the prime minister and the health secretary spoke about it face-to-face, a conversation, one source told me, amounted to a telling off for Mr Streeting.
Neither Downing Street nor the Department of Health deny the meeting took place, with another source insisting afterwards there was “no outstanding issue” between the two men.
Those around the prime minister also acknowledge that it is reasonable that both the health secretary and the justice secretary would face more questions than most on the issue, given they would be responsible for implementing any change in the law.
But the fact that both are opposed to such a change highlights the tensions this is causing within government – could either, realistically, implement such a colossal change, weighted with moral considerations, which they personally opposed?
And what of the prime minister’s position? And how awkward could it be if he finds himself on the losing side of the argument?
It has provoked some pretty searching conversations at the top of government, I am told, about how best to handle it – to minimise the prospect of what some see as an “unnecessary mess”.
A free vote is rare at Westminster, but even with one politicians can never detach themselves entirely from party politics.
Sir Keir has previously said he was in favour of a change in the law and has now told reporters “I will be voting” a week on Friday.
Referring to his time as Director of Public Prosecutions, Sir Keir said:
“People feel very strongly about this. And that’s not a political divide. It’s a sort of individual divide. I know this first hand because obviously I looked at every single assisted suicide case for five years that was investigated.”
He added: “I also did the biggest consultation in criminal justice when we did the consultation on assisted dying. It was the biggest response, because people felt so strongly, and I could feel that, and I’ve always said getting the balance right is crucially important.”
Pointedly, he said he won’t “say or do anything that will put pressure on other people in relation to their vote,” when asked whether he thought the health secretary had broken the understanding that the government should remain neutral on the issue.
Add Comment