Assisted Dying amendment defeated as Kim Leadbeater sees off first challenge after fiery Commons debate

The first amendment, tabled by bill-opposing Tory MP Rebecca Paul, sought to ensure that employers opposed to assisted dying can stop their employees providing assisted dying services.

MPs voted by 279 to 243 against Paul's NC10(a) amendment.

Ahead of the amendment's division, Care Minister Stephen Kinnock suggested Paul's proposed changes would be unworkable.

He said: "It is not clear how this is intended to work alongside other obligations on professionals elsewhere in the bill to perform certain duties. As a result, employees may end up with conflicting obligations.

"It is also not clear how this amendment will work with the protection for employees from detriment and unfair dismissal by their employers, should they choose to participate in the provision of assisted dying.

"If employers can prevent their entire workforce from participating in the provision of assisted dying, then the service may not be available or could be much more difficult to access."

Supporters of assisted dying also claimed victory in today's "closure motion" vote - with 288 MPs voting in favour and 239 MPs voting against.

However, the five-hour debate in the House of Commons appeared to give some insight on the skirmishes MPs expect to face ahead of the next month's voting.

A number of Labour MPs have now come out against the proposed legislation.

Jonathan Hinder, who previously voted for the Bill, said that he was concerned about doctors being able to raise the option unprompted with eligible patients, as well as how doctors can judge a diagnosis.

Peter Lamb, another Labour MP, also said that he will vote against, having previously abstained.

However, voting on today's amendments came after a fiery exchange over Dame Esther Rantzen's letter.

Labour MP Jess Asato described Rantzen's comment about opponents of the bill having "undeclared personal religious beliefs” as “distasteful”.

Raising the comment in the House of Commons, Asato said: “Will (Kim Leadbeater) distance herself from the correspondence from Dame Esther Rantzen, who accuses those of us who have concerns about the Bill as having undeclared religious beliefs. Many colleagues found this distasteful and disrespectful.”

Leadbeater replied: “I haven’t seen those comments, but it’s absolutely right that whatever our views are, whatever our views are on this issue, we must remain respectful.”

Labour MP Florence Eshalomi also criticised Rantzen, adding: “It is frankly insulting to disabled people, hardworking professionals up and down the country who have raised many valid concerns about this Bill, to have it dismissed as religious beliefs.”

Asato later bemoaned how many of the MPs who had tabled amendments to the bill were not called to speak in the House of Commons.

She said: "You said that we're debating the amendments today but we haven't actually been able to hear from the amendment movers. There are nine people who have amendments on this paper who have not been called to speak.

"So, how can we call that a debate when we haven't even heard why they are proposing the amendments in the first place?"

Echoing Asato's concerns, Tory MP John Lamont added: "Supporters of assisted suicide are desperate to shut down scrutiny of their plans.

"It is outrageous that the debate has just been shut down in the House of Commons – we need proper time to consider these plans. This isn’t like any other decision Parliament makes."