‘Delaying ways’ could cease assisted dying Bill after greater than 1,000 amendments proposed

The bill that would legalise assisted suicide could be scuppered by the House of Lords, one of its architects has admitted.

Labour grandee Lord Falconer accused peers of trying to stop the legislation being passed in its allotted time after more than 1,000 amendments were proposed to it.

He also claimed the incoming Archbishop of Canterbury was out of touch with her flock after she warned the proposed law could force cancer sufferers to choose death over treatment.

Lord Falconer will next week attempt to secure more sessions in the upper chamber for scrutiny of the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, which has already been granted 10 extra days.

He will table a motion on Thursday urging that ‘further time should be provided for consideration’ of the bill so it can complete its passage through Parliament ‘before the end of the current parliamentary session’ in May.

Lord Falconer, a minister in Tony Blair’s government, told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme on Friday: ‘I think there is a danger that we would run out of time, not because the Lords doesn’t have time to deal with this, but because the debates are taking so long.

‘I worry that there are a small number of people in the Lords who are trying to talk it out.’

He said it was not the role of the House of Lords to bring down legislation.

Labour grandee Lord Falconer (pictured) accused peers of trying to stop the legislation being passed in its allotted time after more than 1,000 amendments were proposed to it

Pictured: Terminally ill people as well as affected family members supporting the assisted dying bill stand with signs on Parliament Square

‘What we do in the Lords is scrutinise legislation. We don’t block it. This is legislation which the Commons has passed by a clear majority, and this is legislation which reputable opinion polling over a decade has indicated has got wide popular support.’

And in response to the warnings by archbishop-elect Dame Sarah Mullally, he added: ‘The clergy in the Anglican church look like they’re out of tune with their congregations.’

On Friday night Labour peer Baroness Berger hit back at his remarks, telling the Daily Mail: ‘Not a single Royal College, professional body or cabinet minister will attest to the safety of this bill. Scrutiny should never be conflated with obstruction.

‘Our duty in the Lords is to scrutinise and interrogate legislation. This role is even more important when considering issues of life and death.’

And Dr Gordon Macdonald, Chief Executive of Care Not Killing, pointed out that the legislation was introduced as a Private Member’s Bill rather than a Government bill so peers were not bound to approve it.

He said: ‘It was not in a manifesto or part of the Government’s programme, so peers have a duty to scrutinise it, amend it and if necessary, reject it. A view that the Constitutional Committee confirmed only last year.

‘As for his newly found theological expertise, I think I would trust the pronouncements of the new Archbishop of Canterbury and her reading of scripture that it is wrong to kill people or assist them to commit suicide.’

Sources said that even if Lord Falconer’s motion is approved on the nod by the Lords or pushed to a vote, it would not be binding.

The Government would have to find more time for the bill – allowing terminally ill adults with less than six months to live to apply for help ending their lives – which would then mean fewer days debating its own key legislation.