Why have efforts to bring in assisted dying law been thwarted?

Why is the assisted dying legislation not being made into law?

The law was proposed by a backbench MP, Kim Leadbeater, and backed by a majority in the House of Commons. It did not have government support but No 10 allowed a “free vote” of MPs that permitted them to follow their conscience and it was not whipped.

The bill then went to the House of Lords but a small number of opponents of the legislation have laid down so many amendments that it will not be voted on in time to make it through the current parliamentary session that ends in May. There are less than six days left for debate.

Why isn’t the government allowing it more time?

The Labour whip in the House of Lords, Roy Kennedy, told a parliamentary committee that the government would not give it any more time as there were only a limited number of sitting Fridays left.

The government could have helped the bill through by extending the parliamentary session but this would have been an extraordinary move.

What will happen next and will any future attempts succeed?

MPs will no doubt try again in the new parliamentary session with another backbench bill. The current bill’s backers, Leadbeater and Charles Falconer, have taken advice on forcing through the bill next time using an archaic parliamentary procedure if it continues to be blocked by the Lords.

The high stakes move – described by some backers as the “nuclear option” – would be the first time the 1911 Parliament Act has been invoked for a private member’s bill. They have said they have extensive legal and constitutional advice that proves they can force peers to vote on the bill, unamended, in the next session of parliament.

Why have lords been allowed to defeat a bill approved by MPs?

Opponents of the bill in the House of Lords have felt emboldened to frustrate the passage of the bill because it was not sponsored by the government and was not part of the Labour party manifesto with a mandate from the electorate.

There is no rule to say that lords cannot use tactics to prevent a bill being passed but supporters of the legislation say that it goes against the spirit of parliament, namely that MPs should have primacy over peers. Opponents say the Commons did not sufficiently scrutinise the legislation and that they are doing their job by holding it to account.

Are there any precedents for use of the Parliament Act?

The Parliament Act allows the House of Commons to reintroduce a bill and force legislation through if the Lords repeatedly block it. Since 1949, when it was revised, it has been used for just a handful of bills to enact laws that have not had the consent of the Lords, including decriminalising homosexuality and banning foxhunting.

After the session of parliament ends, a bill must be reintroduced and passed again in the new session to trigger the act’s override mechanism. It must be exactly the same version of the bill as passed by the Commons.

There are two ways to invoke the Parliament Act: by a supporter adopting it at the next private member’s bill ballot or for the government to give the bill time to return to the Commons.

How have supporters of the bill reacted to its setbacks in the House of Lords?

Supporters of the bill say it is undemocratic for peers to in effect block the legislation. Dame Esther Rantzen accused some peers of “blatant sabotage”.

Speaking to Sky News on Thursday, she said: “This is a handful of peers putting down 1,200 amendments not to scrutinise the bill, which is their job, but to block it.”