I'm not looking to hurt Russia. I love the Russian people, and always had a very good relationship with President Putin - and this despite the Radical Left's Russia, Russia, Russia HOAX. We must never forget that Russia helped us win the Second World War, losing almost 60,000,000 lives in the process. All of that being said, I'm going to do Russia, whose Economy is failing, and President Putin, a very big FAVOR. Settle now, and STOP this ridiculous War! IT'S ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE. If we don't make a "deal," and soon, I have no other choice but to put high levels of Taxes, Tariffs, and Sanctions on anything being sold by Russia to the United States, and various other participating countries. Let's get this war, which never would have started if I were President, over with! We can do it the easy way, or the hard way - and the easy way is always better. It's time to "MAKE A DEAL." NO MORE LIVES SHOULD BE LOST!!!
I thought 42 million dead was the more accepted number (horrific to even be counting). Perhaps he's adding in dead Ukranians from before the war?
I'm not looking to hurt Russia. I love the Russian people, and always had a very good relationship with President Putin - and this despite the Radical Left's Russia, Russia, Russia HOAX. We must never forget that Russia helped us win the Second World War, losing almost 60,000,000 lives in the process. All of that being said, I'm going to do Russia, whose Economy is failing, and President Putin, a very big FAVOR. Settle now, and STOP this ridiculous War! IT'S ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE. If we don't make a "deal," and soon, I have no other choice but to put high levels of Taxes, Tariffs, and Sanctions on anything being sold by Russia to the United States, and various other participating countries. Let's get this war, which never would have started if I were President, over with! We can do it the easy way, or the hard way - and the easy way is always better. It's time to "MAKE A DEAL." NO MORE LIVES SHOULD BE LOST!!!
I'm not looking to hurt Russia. I love the Russian people, and always had a very good relationship with President Putin - and this despite the Radical Left's Russia, Russia, Russia HOAX. We must never forget that Russia helped us win the Second World War, losing almost 60,000,000 lives in the process. All of that being said, I'm going to do Russia, whose Economy is failing, and President Putin, a very big FAVOR. Settle now, and STOP this ridiculous War! IT'S ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE. If we don't make a "deal," and soon, I have no other choice but to put high levels of Taxes, Tariffs, and Sanctions on anything being sold by Russia to the United States, and various other participating countries. Let's get this war, which never would have started if I were President, over with! We can do it the easy way, or the hard way - and the easy way is always better. It's time to "MAKE A DEAL." NO MORE LIVES SHOULD BE LOST!!!
The guy is nuts/stupid. There are already very extensive US sanctions against Russia such that there is very, very little “being sold by Russia to the United States”. Tariffs are therefore pointless.
US imports from Russia, 2021: $29,600M 2024: $2,900M (but that figure is missing December)
He's neither nuts nor stupid. He's the supreme politician of our era. The closest thing to Bismarck we have today.
I like you, williamglenn. Sometimes people don’t get your sense of humour.
This piece would have been better is it hadn't included ad hominem attacks on Kim Leadbetter and snide digs about Esther Rantzen, and just concentrated on the drafting and scrutiny of the bill.
Cyclefree implies that Rantzen has recently been given the drug Osimertinib, whereas she has been on it for at least 18 months (it has been licensed since 2016) - and more importantly has changed her opinion on assisted dying one jot.
Where does she imply that its recent? And arguably 18 months is recent.
Its a very tricky subject and should not have someone playing fast and loose. Be confident in your case (bill) and do everything above board. Why isn't she doing this? If she was a Tory some wag would suggest she owns shares in the drugs used to help people pass.
Er ... you make far more money out of the drugs that people take for chronic diseases. Not ones the kill the customers.
I'm not looking to hurt Russia. I love the Russian people, and always had a very good relationship with President Putin - and this despite the Radical Left's Russia, Russia, Russia HOAX. We must never forget that Russia helped us win the Second World War, losing almost 60,000,000 lives in the process. All of that being said, I'm going to do Russia, whose Economy is failing, and President Putin, a very big FAVOR. Settle now, and STOP this ridiculous War! IT'S ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE. If we don't make a "deal," and soon, I have no other choice but to put high levels of Taxes, Tariffs, and Sanctions on anything being sold by Russia to the United States, and various other participating countries. Let's get this war, which never would have started if I were President, over with! We can do it the easy way, or the hard way - and the easy way is always better. It's time to "MAKE A DEAL." NO MORE LIVES SHOULD BE LOST!!!
The guy is nuts/stupid. There are already very extensive US sanctions against Russia such that there is very, very little “being sold by Russia to the United States”. Tariffs are therefore pointless.
US imports from Russia, 2021: $29,600M 2024: $2,900M (but that figure is missing December)
He's neither nuts nor stupid. He's the supreme politician of our era. The closest thing to Bismarck we have today.
I don't think "Sink the Trump!" really works as a movie title.
I'm not looking to hurt Russia. I love the Russian people, and always had a very good relationship with President Putin - and this despite the Radical Left's Russia, Russia, Russia HOAX. We must never forget that Russia helped us win the Second World War, losing almost 60,000,000 lives in the process. All of that being said, I'm going to do Russia, whose Economy is failing, and President Putin, a very big FAVOR. Settle now, and STOP this ridiculous War! IT'S ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE. If we don't make a "deal," and soon, I have no other choice but to put high levels of Taxes, Tariffs, and Sanctions on anything being sold by Russia to the United States, and various other participating countries. Let's get this war, which never would have started if I were President, over with! We can do it the easy way, or the hard way - and the easy way is always better. It's time to "MAKE A DEAL." NO MORE LIVES SHOULD BE LOST!!!
The guy is nuts/stupid. There are already very extensive US sanctions against Russia such that there is very, very little “being sold by Russia to the United States”. Tariffs are therefore pointless.
US imports from Russia, 2021: $29,600M 2024: $2,900M (but that figure is missing December)
He's neither nuts nor stupid. He's the supreme politician of our era. The closest thing to Bismarck we have today.
I like you, williamglenn. Sometimes people don’t get your sense of humour.
What politician does WG equate to the Scharnhorst, then?
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
I am totally in favour of assisted dying, I am not in favour of this bill as the safeguards are not sufficient to prevent abuse and the way it is being handled is raising alarm bells frankly.
Going to be a tight day on power generation. Demand high, but wind remains at only 1%. Solar 4% and dropping. Even got the OCGT out for 1%. Gas very high still, as it has been for days/weeks. Same with burning trees.
Demand will be very high on the continent, with low winds, so any imported electricity will be very expensive and restrictive.
Will be interesting to see how close we get to keeping the lights and at what price.
Can't we always import electricity from other countries, even if we have to pay a lot for it?
The UK has a about 6.4GW of interconnectors: 1.4GW to Norway 1GW to the Netherlands 1GW to Ireland 3GW to France
So, no we can't buy all the electricity we need from abroad, although we can buy a fair amount.
That being said, this is about as bad as it gets for UK electricity supply. There's little wind, and we have the combination of short days and cloud cover affecting solar electricity production.
To add to this, we have four nuclear reactors either offline, or running significantly below boiler plate capacity:
Two reactors at Heysham 2 are offline, one where summer maintenance needed to be brought forward and the other completely unscheduled and offline. Heysham 1 is also currently being refuelled and is therefore offline. And finally, Hartlepool is offline due to a condensate leak.
Of these four outages, only one was planned to happen over the winter period: Heysham 1 fueling. (And candidly, they should have done it earlier so it didn't coincide with peak electricity and trough insolation.)
Without the nuclear issues, we'd be doing fine. Even with them, we're OK. But I wouldn't want to see another nuclear plant go offline.
Just to add: Heysham 1 refuelling is due to complete tomorrow, and that's a 1.1GW plant, so when it comes back online that will make a big difference.
How would the layman find this news, Is there an aggregator for UK energy chat?
Wind is obviously totally unreliable - exactly what you don't need for electricity supply.
Coal is looking more and more attractive - abundant globally, cheap, proven and reliable. We should stop rigging the market in favour of renewables, or unreliables as I call them, and see what energy sources it chooses, as we did in the 90s. My guess would be some combination of gas, coal and nuclear.
Tide is totally reliable.
Coal is dirty, difficult to extract and contributes to global warming. The previous government got a lot wrong but phasing out coal generation was one of the few things it got right.
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
I am in favour of the bill, and also think it overdue, but really don't understand why the process can't be done in a more rigorous manner to at least listen to the concerns of those against.
This piece would have been better is it hadn't included ad hominem attacks on Kim Leadbetter and snide digs about Esther Rantzen, and just concentrated on the drafting and scrutiny of the bill.
Cyclefree implies that Rantzen has recently been given the drug Osimertinib, whereas she has been on it for at least 18 months (it has been licensed since 2016) - and more importantly has changed her opinion on assisted dying one jot.
Where does she imply that its recent? And arguably 18 months is recent.
Its a very tricky subject and should not have someone playing fast and loose. Be confident in your case (bill) and do everything above board. Why isn't she doing this? If she was a Tory some wag would suggest she owns shares in the drugs used to help people pass.
Er ... you make far more money out of the drugs that people take for chronic diseases. Not ones the kill the customers.
Obviously - but I'm trying to see why Leadbetter is doing what she is doing.
I'm not looking to hurt Russia. I love the Russian people, and always had a very good relationship with President Putin - and this despite the Radical Left's Russia, Russia, Russia HOAX. We must never forget that Russia helped us win the Second World War, losing almost 60,000,000 lives in the process. All of that being said, I'm going to do Russia, whose Economy is failing, and President Putin, a very big FAVOR. Settle now, and STOP this ridiculous War! IT'S ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE. If we don't make a "deal," and soon, I have no other choice but to put high levels of Taxes, Tariffs, and Sanctions on anything being sold by Russia to the United States, and various other participating countries. Let's get this war, which never would have started if I were President, over with! We can do it the easy way, or the hard way - and the easy way is always better. It's time to "MAKE A DEAL." NO MORE LIVES SHOULD BE LOST!!!
I thought 42 million dead was the more accepted number (horrific to even be counting). Perhaps he's adding in dead Ukranians from before the war?
And that was Soviet losses, rather than Russian, with many dead from each of the other republics of the USSR, not least 6 million Ukranians.
Going to be a tight day on power generation. Demand high, but wind remains at only 1%. Solar 4% and dropping. Even got the OCGT out for 1%. Gas very high still, as it has been for days/weeks. Same with burning trees.
Demand will be very high on the continent, with low winds, so any imported electricity will be very expensive and restrictive.
Will be interesting to see how close we get to keeping the lights and at what price.
Can't we always import electricity from other countries, even if we have to pay a lot for it?
The UK has a about 6.4GW of interconnectors: 1.4GW to Norway 1GW to the Netherlands 1GW to Ireland 3GW to France
So, no we can't buy all the electricity we need from abroad, although we can buy a fair amount.
That being said, this is about as bad as it gets for UK electricity supply. There's little wind, and we have the combination of short days and cloud cover affecting solar electricity production.
To add to this, we have four nuclear reactors either offline, or running significantly below boiler plate capacity:
Two reactors at Heysham 2 are offline, one where summer maintenance needed to be brought forward and the other completely unscheduled and offline. Heysham 1 is also currently being refuelled and is therefore offline. And finally, Hartlepool is offline due to a condensate leak.
Of these four outages, only one was planned to happen over the winter period: Heysham 1 fueling. (And candidly, they should have done it earlier so it didn't coincide with peak electricity and trough insolation.)
Without the nuclear issues, we'd be doing fine. Even with them, we're OK. But I wouldn't want to see another nuclear plant go offline.
Just to add: Heysham 1 refuelling is due to complete tomorrow, and that's a 1.1GW plant, so when it comes back online that will make a big difference.
How would the layman find this news, Is there an aggregator for UK energy chat?
Wind is obviously totally unreliable - exactly what you don't need for electricity supply.
Coal is looking more and more attractive - abundant globally, cheap, proven and reliable. We should stop rigging the market in favour of renewables, or unreliables as I call them, and see what energy sources it chooses, as we did in the 90s. My guess would be some combination of gas, coal and nuclear.
Tide is totally reliable.
Coal is dirty, difficult to extract and contributes to global warming. The previous government got a lot wrong but phasing out coals was one of the few things it got right.
Anyone else remember the debate on PB about whether extracting energy from the tides would lead to changes in the moon-earth relationship in (relatively) short time scales? Halcyon days.
Going to be a tight day on power generation. Demand high, but wind remains at only 1%. Solar 4% and dropping. Even got the OCGT out for 1%. Gas very high still, as it has been for days/weeks. Same with burning trees.
Demand will be very high on the continent, with low winds, so any imported electricity will be very expensive and restrictive.
Will be interesting to see how close we get to keeping the lights and at what price.
Can't we always import electricity from other countries, even if we have to pay a lot for it?
The UK has a about 6.4GW of interconnectors: 1.4GW to Norway 1GW to the Netherlands 1GW to Ireland 3GW to France
So, no we can't buy all the electricity we need from abroad, although we can buy a fair amount.
That being said, this is about as bad as it gets for UK electricity supply. There's little wind, and we have the combination of short days and cloud cover affecting solar electricity production.
To add to this, we have four nuclear reactors either offline, or running significantly below boiler plate capacity:
Two reactors at Heysham 2 are offline, one where summer maintenance needed to be brought forward and the other completely unscheduled and offline. Heysham 1 is also currently being refuelled and is therefore offline. And finally, Hartlepool is offline due to a condensate leak.
Of these four outages, only one was planned to happen over the winter period: Heysham 1 fueling. (And candidly, they should have done it earlier so it didn't coincide with peak electricity and trough insolation.)
Without the nuclear issues, we'd be doing fine. Even with them, we're OK. But I wouldn't want to see another nuclear plant go offline.
Just to add: Heysham 1 refuelling is due to complete tomorrow, and that's a 1.1GW plant, so when it comes back online that will make a big difference.
How would the layman find this news, Is there an aggregator for UK energy chat?
Wind is obviously totally unreliable - exactly what you don't need for electricity supply.
Coal is looking more and more attractive - abundant globally, cheap, proven and reliable. We should stop rigging the market in favour of renewables, or unreliables as I call them, and see what energy sources it chooses, as we did in the 90s. My guess would be some combination of gas, coal and nuclear.
Tide is totally reliable.
Coal is dirty, difficult to extract and contributes to global warming. The previous government got a lot wrong but phasing out coal generation was one of the few things it got right.
Tide is totally reliable for getting stains out of your clothing, even at lower temperatures!
Going to be a tight day on power generation. Demand high, but wind remains at only 1%. Solar 4% and dropping. Even got the OCGT out for 1%. Gas very high still, as it has been for days/weeks. Same with burning trees.
Demand will be very high on the continent, with low winds, so any imported electricity will be very expensive and restrictive.
Will be interesting to see how close we get to keeping the lights and at what price.
Can't we always import electricity from other countries, even if we have to pay a lot for it?
The UK has a about 6.4GW of interconnectors: 1.4GW to Norway 1GW to the Netherlands 1GW to Ireland 3GW to France
So, no we can't buy all the electricity we need from abroad, although we can buy a fair amount.
That being said, this is about as bad as it gets for UK electricity supply. There's little wind, and we have the combination of short days and cloud cover affecting solar electricity production.
To add to this, we have four nuclear reactors either offline, or running significantly below boiler plate capacity:
Two reactors at Heysham 2 are offline, one where summer maintenance needed to be brought forward and the other completely unscheduled and offline. Heysham 1 is also currently being refuelled and is therefore offline. And finally, Hartlepool is offline due to a condensate leak.
Of these four outages, only one was planned to happen over the winter period: Heysham 1 fueling. (And candidly, they should have done it earlier so it didn't coincide with peak electricity and trough insolation.)
Without the nuclear issues, we'd be doing fine. Even with them, we're OK. But I wouldn't want to see another nuclear plant go offline.
Just to add: Heysham 1 refuelling is due to complete tomorrow, and that's a 1.1GW plant, so when it comes back online that will make a big difference.
How would the layman find this news, Is there an aggregator for UK energy chat?
Wind is obviously totally unreliable - exactly what you don't need for electricity supply.
Coal is looking more and more attractive - abundant globally, cheap, proven and reliable. We should stop rigging the market in favour of renewables, or unreliables as I call them, and see what energy sources it chooses, as we did in the 90s. My guess would be some combination of gas, coal and nuclear.
Tide is totally reliable.
Coal is dirty, difficult to extract and contributes to global warming. The previous government got a lot wrong but phasing out coal generation was one of the few things it got right.
Demand management is also a biggie. Heavy users will get cheap electricity while it is plentiful in return for switching off in times of tight supply.
I'm not looking to hurt Russia. I love the Russian people, and always had a very good relationship with President Putin - and this despite the Radical Left's Russia, Russia, Russia HOAX. We must never forget that Russia helped us win the Second World War, losing almost 60,000,000 lives in the process. All of that being said, I'm going to do Russia, whose Economy is failing, and President Putin, a very big FAVOR. Settle now, and STOP this ridiculous War! IT'S ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE. If we don't make a "deal," and soon, I have no other choice but to put high levels of Taxes, Tariffs, and Sanctions on anything being sold by Russia to the United States, and various other participating countries. Let's get this war, which never would have started if I were President, over with! We can do it the easy way, or the hard way - and the easy way is always better. It's time to "MAKE A DEAL." NO MORE LIVES SHOULD BE LOST!!!
The guy is nuts/stupid. There are already very extensive US sanctions against Russia such that there is very, very little “being sold by Russia to the United States”. Tariffs are therefore pointless.
US imports from Russia, 2021: $29,600M 2024: $2,900M (but that figure is missing December)
He's neither nuts nor stupid. He's the supreme politician of our era. The closest thing to Bismarck we have today.
‘A Bismark is a raised doughnut filled with jelly or jam’
Going to be a tight day on power generation. Demand high, but wind remains at only 1%. Solar 4% and dropping. Even got the OCGT out for 1%. Gas very high still, as it has been for days/weeks. Same with burning trees.
Demand will be very high on the continent, with low winds, so any imported electricity will be very expensive and restrictive.
Will be interesting to see how close we get to keeping the lights and at what price.
Can't we always import electricity from other countries, even if we have to pay a lot for it?
The UK has a about 6.4GW of interconnectors: 1.4GW to Norway 1GW to the Netherlands 1GW to Ireland 3GW to France
So, no we can't buy all the electricity we need from abroad, although we can buy a fair amount.
That being said, this is about as bad as it gets for UK electricity supply. There's little wind, and we have the combination of short days and cloud cover affecting solar electricity production.
To add to this, we have four nuclear reactors either offline, or running significantly below boiler plate capacity:
Two reactors at Heysham 2 are offline, one where summer maintenance needed to be brought forward and the other completely unscheduled and offline. Heysham 1 is also currently being refuelled and is therefore offline. And finally, Hartlepool is offline due to a condensate leak.
Of these four outages, only one was planned to happen over the winter period: Heysham 1 fueling. (And candidly, they should have done it earlier so it didn't coincide with peak electricity and trough insolation.)
Without the nuclear issues, we'd be doing fine. Even with them, we're OK. But I wouldn't want to see another nuclear plant go offline.
Just to add: Heysham 1 refuelling is due to complete tomorrow, and that's a 1.1GW plant, so when it comes back online that will make a big difference.
How would the layman find this news, Is there an aggregator for UK energy chat?
Wind is obviously totally unreliable - exactly what you don't need for electricity supply.
Coal is looking more and more attractive - abundant globally, cheap, proven and reliable. We should stop rigging the market in favour of renewables, or unreliables as I call them, and see what energy sources it chooses, as we did in the 90s. My guess would be some combination of gas, coal and nuclear.
The market is rigging itself in favour of renewables. Solar (which you have carefully omitted) is getting cheaper and more efficient/ Battery storage is getting cheaper and more efficient.
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
I'm not looking to hurt Russia. I love the Russian people, and always had a very good relationship with President Putin - and this despite the Radical Left's Russia, Russia, Russia HOAX. We must never forget that Russia helped us win the Second World War, losing almost 60,000,000 lives in the process. All of that being said, I'm going to do Russia, whose Economy is failing, and President Putin, a very big FAVOR. Settle now, and STOP this ridiculous War! IT'S ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE. If we don't make a "deal," and soon, I have no other choice but to put high levels of Taxes, Tariffs, and Sanctions on anything being sold by Russia to the United States, and various other participating countries. Let's get this war, which never would have started if I were President, over with! We can do it the easy way, or the hard way - and the easy way is always better. It's time to "MAKE A DEAL." NO MORE LIVES SHOULD BE LOST!!!
The guy is nuts/stupid. There are already very extensive US sanctions against Russia such that there is very, very little “being sold by Russia to the United States”. Tariffs are therefore pointless.
US imports from Russia, 2021: $29,600M 2024: $2,900M (but that figure is missing December)
He's neither nuts nor stupid. He's the supreme politician of our era. The closest thing to Bismarck we have today.
‘A Bismark is a raised doughnut filled with jelly or jam’
Fair enough.
JFK did call himself a doughnut, more like the round kind with jam all inside. Not sure what the difference is.
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
Several posters on here, myself included, have said we are in favour of the principle of assisted dying but we have huge concerns about the approach being taken by Kim Leadbetter, that’s what you should be focussing on.
In my career the best way I have won people over is by showing my workings to them, not doing things hidden in the shadows.
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
That might be your opinion but the header is very clearly about the process that is happening around the bill and is on the money,
David Steel's Abortion Act 1967 was brought in using a very similar process as a Private Member's Bill.
Because it is a matter of personal belief, it is very difficult for it to be a Government Bill.
In fact it would be inappropriate for it to be a Government Bill with whipping.
This was the only way to introduce it. The Committee will now examine it to improve it. I hope they take judges out of the process as they have no useful role.
Objections to the process mask objections to the principle.
Jas anyone commented on Sadiq Khan pinching electric buses off other routes do he can say the new tunnel is carbon neutral.. these politicians(of all parties) are despicable... because they would have all done it.
Of these witnesses, 8 are supporters from other jurisdictions. There are no opponents. Of the 9 lawyers called, 6 are in favour of the Bill and 3 neutral. Again there are no opponents.
This is outrageous.
There's this too.
See the long list of witnesses. There will be many who will be disappointed to not make the list but it looks comprehensive to me.
The Committee has started its work and the amendments are open to public view. I think they have made a good start. I support the Sarah Olney amendment. But there are many more public meetings and expert witnesses to come. It's going to be a thorough process.
I am totally in favour of assisted dying, I am not in favour of this bill as the safeguards are not sufficient to prevent abuse and the way it is being handled is raising alarm bells frankly.
Possible but from what I see the risk is bigger the other way. The hoops are so onerous that only the well organised and wealthy can get through them. A bit like divorce in the 19th century.
If you are opposed in principle you probably don't mind this.
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
If Cyclefree is wrong, then one opponent would be enough.
Majority support is no argument for or against a proposition.
Cyclefree’s arguments are extremely cogent, and if you believe that those arguments are wrong, then you need to make a case that they are wrong.
Polls often show a majority - even a large majority - for the death penalty. On this argument it would be fine to shove through any crappy bill, no matter how botched and dubious, to bring back the noose - as it’s “what the people want”
That would be a great evil. The state giving itself powers to kill peacetime civilians is a momentous thing. Which needs serious and proper debate
As does the state giving itself powers to enable and facilitate suicide
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
That might be your opinion but the header is very clearly about the process that is happening around the bill and is on the money,
David Steel's Abortion Act 1967 was brought in using a very similar process as a Private Member's Bill.
Because it is a matter of personal belief, it is very difficult for it to be a Government Bill.
In fact it would be inappropriate for it to be a Government Bill with whipping.
This was the only way to introduce it. The Committee will now examine it to improve it. I hope they take judges out of the process as they have no useful role.
Objections to the process mask objections to the principle.
The Abortion Act is almost the dictionary definition of the slippery slope.
A quarter of a million abortions in England and Wales in 2022, the last year for which statistics are available, up more than 25% in the last decade alone.
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
Several posters on here, myself included, have said we are in favour of the principle of assisted dying but we have huge concerns about the approach being taken by Kim Leadbetter, that’s what you should be focussing on.
In my career the best way I have won people over is by showing my workings to them, not doing things hidden in the shadows.
See my post at 3.14pm.
How would you change the approach to bring in this proposed law?
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
Whether or not you are in favour of assisted dying, which, for the record, I am, in principle, the way this bill is being “scrutinised “ is extremely questionable. I wouldn’t vote in favour of it on that basis. If Kim Leadbeater wants it to pass, she going about it incorrectly. She is shooting herself in the foot.
Of these witnesses, 8 are supporters from other jurisdictions. There are no opponents. Of the 9 lawyers called, 6 are in favour of the Bill and 3 neutral. Again there are no opponents.
This is outrageous.
There's this too.
See the long list of witnesses. There will be many who will be disappointed to not make the list but it looks comprehensive to me.
The Committee has started its work and the amendments are open to public view. I think they have made a good start. I support the Sarah Olney amendment. But there are many more public meetings and expert witnesses to come. It's going to be a thorough process.
The ‘objectively impressive and rigourous’ list of witnesses, contains no-one who opposes the Bill. None of the lawyers called to appear oppose the Bill either. The Committee is hearing only one side of the argument.
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
That might be your opinion but the header is very clearly about the process that is happening around the bill and is on the money,
David Steel's Abortion Act 1967 was brought in using a very similar process as a Private Member's Bill.
Because it is a matter of personal belief, it is very difficult for it to be a Government Bill.
In fact it would be inappropriate for it to be a Government Bill with whipping.
This was the only way to introduce it. The Committee will now examine it to improve it. I hope they take judges out of the process as they have no useful role.
Objections to the process mask objections to the principle.
The Abortion Act is almost the dictionary definition of the slippery slope.
A quarter of a million abortions in England and Wales in 2022, the last year for which statistics are available, up more than 25% in the last decade alone.
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
That might be your opinion but the header is very clearly about the process that is happening around the bill and is on the money,
David Steel's Abortion Act 1967 was brought in using a very similar process as a Private Member's Bill.
Because it is a matter of personal belief, it is very difficult for it to be a Government Bill.
In fact it would be inappropriate for it to be a Government Bill with whipping.
This was the only way to introduce it. The Committee will now examine it to improve it. I hope they take judges out of the process as they have no useful role.
Objections to the process mask objections to the principle.
The Abortion Act is almost the dictionary definition of the slippery slope.
A quarter of a million abortions in England and Wales in 2022, the last year for which statistics are available, up more than 25% in the last decade alone.
Of these witnesses, 8 are supporters from other jurisdictions. There are no opponents. Of the 9 lawyers called, 6 are in favour of the Bill and 3 neutral. Again there are no opponents.
This is outrageous.
There's this too.
See the long list of witnesses. There will be many who will be disappointed to not make the list but it looks comprehensive to me.
The Committee has started its work and the amendments are open to public view. I think they have made a good start. I support the Sarah Olney amendment. But there are many more public meetings and expert witnesses to come. It's going to be a thorough process.
The ‘objectively impressive and rigourous’ list of witnesses, contains no-one who opposes the Bill. None of the lawyers called to appear oppose the Bill either. The Committee is hearing only one side of the argument.
Have you checked the list of witnesses to see if it contains anyone who opposes the bill?
I'm not looking to hurt Russia. I love the Russian people, and always had a very good relationship with President Putin - and this despite the Radical Left's Russia, Russia, Russia HOAX. We must never forget that Russia helped us win the Second World War, losing almost 60,000,000 lives in the process. All of that being said, I'm going to do Russia, whose Economy is failing, and President Putin, a very big FAVOR. Settle now, and STOP this ridiculous War! IT'S ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE. If we don't make a "deal," and soon, I have no other choice but to put high levels of Taxes, Tariffs, and Sanctions on anything being sold by Russia to the United States, and various other participating countries. Let's get this war, which never would have started if I were President, over with! We can do it the easy way, or the hard way - and the easy way is always better. It's time to "MAKE A DEAL." NO MORE LIVES SHOULD BE LOST!!!
The guy is nuts/stupid. There are already very extensive US sanctions against Russia such that there is very, very little “being sold by Russia to the United States”. Tariffs are therefore pointless.
US imports from Russia, 2021: $29,600M 2024: $2,900M (but that figure is missing December)
"and various other participating countries"
Sanctions against Russia's suppliers is what you've missed here.
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
Several posters on here, myself included, have said we are in favour of the principle of assisted dying but we have huge concerns about the approach being taken by Kim Leadbetter, that’s what you should be focussing on.
In my career the best way I have won people over is by showing my workings to them, not doing things hidden in the shadows.
See my post at 3.14pm.
How would you change the approach to bring in this proposed law?
By having a vigorous debate.
My concern is that people will go for assisted dying for financial reasons or that they are pressured into it.
Assisted dying should be safe, legal, and rare, with Kim Leadbetter’s approach it won’t be the third adjective.
Of these witnesses, 8 are supporters from other jurisdictions. There are no opponents. Of the 9 lawyers called, 6 are in favour of the Bill and 3 neutral. Again there are no opponents.
This is outrageous.
There's this too.
See the long list of witnesses. There will be many who will be disappointed to not make the list but it looks comprehensive to me.
The Committee has started its work and the amendments are open to public view. I think they have made a good start. I support the Sarah Olney amendment. But there are many more public meetings and expert witnesses to come. It's going to be a thorough process.
The ‘objectively impressive and rigourous’ list of witnesses, contains no-one who opposes the Bill. None of the lawyers called to appear oppose the Bill either. The Committee is hearing only one side of the argument.
Have you checked the list of witnesses to see if it contains anyone who opposes the bill?
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
That might be your opinion but the header is very clearly about the process that is happening around the bill and is on the money,
David Steel's Abortion Act 1967 was brought in using a very similar process as a Private Member's Bill.
Because it is a matter of personal belief, it is very difficult for it to be a Government Bill.
In fact it would be inappropriate for it to be a Government Bill with whipping.
This was the only way to introduce it. The Committee will now examine it to improve it. I hope they take judges out of the process as they have no useful role.
Objections to the process mask objections to the principle.
The Abortion Act is almost the dictionary definition of the slippery slope.
A quarter of a million abortions in England and Wales in 2022, the last year for which statistics are available, up more than 25% in the last decade alone.
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
Several posters on here, myself included, have said we are in favour of the principle of assisted dying but we have huge concerns about the approach being taken by Kim Leadbetter, that’s what you should be focussing on.
In my career the best way I have won people over is by showing my workings to them, not doing things hidden in the shadows.
See my post at 3.14pm.
How would you change the approach to bring in this proposed law?
By having a vigorous debate.
My concern is that people will go for assisted dying for financial reasons or that they are pressured into it.
Assisted dying should be safe, legal, and rare, with Kim Leadbetter’s approach it won’t be the third adjective.
Why should it be rare? In years to come, I hope it will be the norm. When you have no quality of life, blocking a bed, using up your kids inheritance, it will be natural, but not compulsory, to end your life.
I'm not looking to hurt Russia. I love the Russian people, and always had a very good relationship with President Putin - and this despite the Radical Left's Russia, Russia, Russia HOAX. We must never forget that Russia helped us win the Second World War, losing almost 60,000,000 lives in the process. All of that being said, I'm going to do Russia, whose Economy is failing, and President Putin, a very big FAVOR. Settle now, and STOP this ridiculous War! IT'S ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE. If we don't make a "deal," and soon, I have no other choice but to put high levels of Taxes, Tariffs, and Sanctions on anything being sold by Russia to the United States, and various other participating countries. Let's get this war, which never would have started if I were President, over with! We can do it the easy way, or the hard way - and the easy way is always better. It's time to "MAKE A DEAL." NO MORE LIVES SHOULD BE LOST!!!
The guy is nuts/stupid. There are already very extensive US sanctions against Russia such that there is very, very little “being sold by Russia to the United States”. Tariffs are therefore pointless.
US imports from Russia, 2021: $29,600M 2024: $2,900M (but that figure is missing December)
"and various other participating countries"
Sanctions against Russia's suppliers is what you've missed here.
That would be primarily China, but I'd imagine sanctions against China would hurt everyone else as much as they'd hurt Russia.
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
Several posters on here, myself included, have said we are in favour of the principle of assisted dying but we have huge concerns about the approach being taken by Kim Leadbetter, that’s what you should be focussing on.
In my career the best way I have won people over is by showing my workings to them, not doing things hidden in the shadows.
See my post at 3.14pm.
How would you change the approach to bring in this proposed law?
By having a vigorous debate.
My concern is that people will go for assisted dying for financial reasons or that they are pressured into it.
Assisted dying should be safe, legal, and rare, with Kim Leadbetter’s approach it won’t be the third adjective.
Why should it be rare? In years to come, I hope it will be the norm. When you have no quality of life, blocking a bed, using up your kids inheritance, it will be natural, but not compulsory, to end your life.
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
Several posters on here, myself included, have said we are in favour of the principle of assisted dying but we have huge concerns about the approach being taken by Kim Leadbetter, that’s what you should be focussing on.
In my career the best way I have won people over is by showing my workings to them, not doing things hidden in the shadows.
See my post at 3.14pm.
How would you change the approach to bring in this proposed law?
By having a vigorous debate.
My concern is that people will go for assisted dying for financial reasons or that they are pressured into it.
Assisted dying should be safe, legal, and rare, with Kim Leadbetter’s approach it won’t be the third adjective.
Should it be rare? It should be as common as it is needed.
I quite like reading obituaries. Garth Hudson, late of The Band, has just passed away, aged 87.
This is the penultimate line of his obit (in The Guardian) which followed a brief description of his bankruptcies:
"In 2013 a landlord sold the contents of a loft space in upstate New York which had been used for storage and on which rent had not been paid for seven years; the items included handwritten sheet music and an uncashed royalty cheque for $26,000 dating from 1979."
Of these witnesses, 8 are supporters from other jurisdictions. There are no opponents. Of the 9 lawyers called, 6 are in favour of the Bill and 3 neutral. Again there are no opponents.
This is outrageous.
There's this too.
See the long list of witnesses. There will be many who will be disappointed to not make the list but it looks comprehensive to me.
The Committee has started its work and the amendments are open to public view. I think they have made a good start. I support the Sarah Olney amendment. But there are many more public meetings and expert witnesses to come. It's going to be a thorough process.
The ‘objectively impressive and rigourous’ list of witnesses, contains no-one who opposes the Bill. None of the lawyers called to appear oppose the Bill either. The Committee is hearing only one side of the argument.
Have you checked the list of witnesses to see if it contains anyone who opposes the bill?
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
Several posters on here, myself included, have said we are in favour of the principle of assisted dying but we have huge concerns about the approach being taken by Kim Leadbetter, that’s what you should be focussing on.
In my career the best way I have won people over is by showing my workings to them, not doing things hidden in the shadows.
See my post at 3.14pm.
How would you change the approach to bring in this proposed law?
By having a vigorous debate.
My concern is that people will go for assisted dying for financial reasons or that they are pressured into it.
Assisted dying should be safe, legal, and rare, with Kim Leadbetter’s approach it won’t be the third adjective.
Should it be rare? It should be as common as it is needed.
I am hoping for medical improvements so the quality of life is improved so we don’t get these diseases that make people want to end their lives.
Going to be a tight day on power generation. Demand high, but wind remains at only 1%. Solar 4% and dropping. Even got the OCGT out for 1%. Gas very high still, as it has been for days/weeks. Same with burning trees.
Demand will be very high on the continent, with low winds, so any imported electricity will be very expensive and restrictive.
Will be interesting to see how close we get to keeping the lights and at what price.
Can't we always import electricity from other countries, even if we have to pay a lot for it?
The UK has a about 6.4GW of interconnectors: 1.4GW to Norway 1GW to the Netherlands 1GW to Ireland 3GW to France
So, no we can't buy all the electricity we need from abroad, although we can buy a fair amount.
That being said, this is about as bad as it gets for UK electricity supply. There's little wind, and we have the combination of short days and cloud cover affecting solar electricity production.
To add to this, we have four nuclear reactors either offline, or running significantly below boiler plate capacity:
Two reactors at Heysham 2 are offline, one where summer maintenance needed to be brought forward and the other completely unscheduled and offline. Heysham 1 is also currently being refuelled and is therefore offline. And finally, Hartlepool is offline due to a condensate leak.
Of these four outages, only one was planned to happen over the winter period: Heysham 1 fueling. (And candidly, they should have done it earlier so it didn't coincide with peak electricity and trough insolation.)
Without the nuclear issues, we'd be doing fine. Even with them, we're OK. But I wouldn't want to see another nuclear plant go offline.
Just to add: Heysham 1 refuelling is due to complete tomorrow, and that's a 1.1GW plant, so when it comes back online that will make a big difference.
How would the layman find this news, Is there an aggregator for UK energy chat?
Wind is obviously totally unreliable - exactly what you don't need for electricity supply.
Coal is looking more and more attractive - abundant globally, cheap, proven and reliable. We should stop rigging the market in favour of renewables, or unreliables as I call them, and see what energy sources it chooses, as we did in the 90s. My guess would be some combination of gas, coal and nuclear.
The market is rigging itself in favour of renewables. Solar (which you have carefully omitted) is getting cheaper and more efficient/ Battery storage is getting cheaper and more efficient.
Would be interesting to see the real reliability for nuclear. Always been dubious since a 6th form trip to a magnox, when I asked how much electricity it was producing we were told it couldn't export to the grid because "one of the turbines was out for maintenance so the other was spinning too fast", lights were on though...
Of these witnesses, 8 are supporters from other jurisdictions. There are no opponents. Of the 9 lawyers called, 6 are in favour of the Bill and 3 neutral. Again there are no opponents.
This is outrageous.
There's this too.
See the long list of witnesses. There will be many who will be disappointed to not make the list but it looks comprehensive to me.
The Committee has started its work and the amendments are open to public view. I think they have made a good start. I support the Sarah Olney amendment. But there are many more public meetings and expert witnesses to come. It's going to be a thorough process.
The ‘objectively impressive and rigourous’ list of witnesses, contains no-one who opposes the Bill. None of the lawyers called to appear oppose the Bill either. The Committee is hearing only one side of the argument.
Have you checked the list of witnesses to see if it contains anyone who opposes the bill?
I just have, and it contains the name of Barbara Rick who vehemently opposes the Bill and was referred to earlier by TSE.
Yes but that’s not the point I was making, she has been dismissed as a junior barrister by the committee when she’s anything but.
Listening to one side of an argument rarely ends well.
Dismissed? Taken off the list? Or one member of the Committee has made a disparaging remark? I can't find a record of that. It may be so. I'm sure there will be disparaging remarks made on both sides. It's hardly a killer point.
I'm not looking to hurt Russia. I love the Russian people, and always had a very good relationship with President Putin - and this despite the Radical Left's Russia, Russia, Russia HOAX. We must never forget that Russia helped us win the Second World War, losing almost 60,000,000 lives in the process. All of that being said, I'm going to do Russia, whose Economy is failing, and President Putin, a very big FAVOR. Settle now, and STOP this ridiculous War! IT'S ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE. If we don't make a "deal," and soon, I have no other choice but to put high levels of Taxes, Tariffs, and Sanctions on anything being sold by Russia to the United States, and various other participating countries. Let's get this war, which never would have started if I were President, over with! We can do it the easy way, or the hard way - and the easy way is always better. It's time to "MAKE A DEAL." NO MORE LIVES SHOULD BE LOST!!!
The guy is nuts/stupid. There are already very extensive US sanctions against Russia such that there is very, very little “being sold by Russia to the United States”. Tariffs are therefore pointless.
US imports from Russia, 2021: $29,600M 2024: $2,900M (but that figure is missing December)
"and various other participating countries"
Sanctions against Russia's suppliers is what you've missed here.
That would be primarily China, but I'd imagine sanctions against China would hurt everyone else as much as they'd hurt Russia.
Trump has already said he'll impose a 30% tariff on China anyway, for reasons unrelated to Ukraine.
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
That might be your opinion but the header is very clearly about the process that is happening around the bill and is on the money,
David Steel's Abortion Act 1967 was brought in using a very similar process as a Private Member's Bill.
Because it is a matter of personal belief, it is very difficult for it to be a Government Bill.
In fact it would be inappropriate for it to be a Government Bill with whipping.
This was the only way to introduce it. The Committee will now examine it to improve it. I hope they take judges out of the process as they have no useful role.
Objections to the process mask objections to the principle.
The Abortion Act is almost the dictionary definition of the slippery slope.
A quarter of a million abortions in England and Wales in 2022, the last year for which statistics are available, up more than 25% in the last decade alone.
How is that a slippery slope? That's what the people behind the Act planned.
Which is why this Bill is so pernicious.
When the Abortion Act now results in 250k abortions vs 600k births, we can likely summise that this Bill might produce a similar result in deaths a few years down the line…
Of these witnesses, 8 are supporters from other jurisdictions. There are no opponents. Of the 9 lawyers called, 6 are in favour of the Bill and 3 neutral. Again there are no opponents.
This is outrageous.
There's this too.
See the long list of witnesses. There will be many who will be disappointed to not make the list but it looks comprehensive to me.
The Committee has started its work and the amendments are open to public view. I think they have made a good start. I support the Sarah Olney amendment. But there are many more public meetings and expert witnesses to come. It's going to be a thorough process.
The ‘objectively impressive and rigourous’ list of witnesses, contains no-one who opposes the Bill. None of the lawyers called to appear oppose the Bill either. The Committee is hearing only one side of the argument.
Have you checked the list of witnesses to see if it contains anyone who opposes the bill?
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
I am in favour of the bill, and also think it overdue, but really don't understand why the process can't be done in a more rigorous manner to at least listen to the concerns of those against.
Not a constitutional expert but as the bill has passed the second reading it means assisted dying has been accepted in principle and the next committee stage is about making it work before final acceptance. So I guess the question is whether the scrutiny is rigorous enough. I don't think you necessarily need people opposed to the measure in principle to make it work
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
Several posters on here, myself included, have said we are in favour of the principle of assisted dying but we have huge concerns about the approach being taken by Kim Leadbetter, that’s what you should be focussing on.
In my career the best way I have won people over is by showing my workings to them, not doing things hidden in the shadows.
See my post at 3.14pm.
How would you change the approach to bring in this proposed law?
By having a vigorous debate.
My concern is that people will go for assisted dying for financial reasons or that they are pressured into it.
Assisted dying should be safe, legal, and rare, with Kim Leadbetter’s approach it won’t be the third adjective.
Should it be rare? It should be as common as it is needed.
I am hoping for medical improvements so the quality of life is improved so we don’t get these diseases that make people want to end their lives.
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
Several posters on here, myself included, have said we are in favour of the principle of assisted dying but we have huge concerns about the approach being taken by Kim Leadbetter, that’s what you should be focussing on.
In my career the best way I have won people over is by showing my workings to them, not doing things hidden in the shadows.
See my post at 3.14pm.
How would you change the approach to bring in this proposed law?
By having a vigorous debate.
My concern is that people will go for assisted dying for financial reasons or that they are pressured into it.
Assisted dying should be safe, legal, and rare, with Kim Leadbetter’s approach it won’t be the third adjective.
Why should it be rare? In years to come, I hope it will be the norm. When you have no quality of life, blocking a bed, using up your kids inheritance, it will be natural, but not compulsory, to end your life.
And, there we have it.
I think the commas represent ANDs rather than ORs. At least, I hope so!
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
Several posters on here, myself included, have said we are in favour of the principle of assisted dying but we have huge concerns about the approach being taken by Kim Leadbetter, that’s what you should be focussing on.
In my career the best way I have won people over is by showing my workings to them, not doing things hidden in the shadows.
See my post at 3.14pm.
How would you change the approach to bring in this proposed law?
By having a vigorous debate.
My concern is that people will go for assisted dying for financial reasons or that they are pressured into it.
Assisted dying should be safe, legal, and rare, with Kim Leadbetter’s approach it won’t be the third adjective.
Why should it be rare? In years to come, I hope it will be the norm. When you have no quality of life, blocking a bed, using up your kids inheritance, it will be natural, but not compulsory, to end your life.
And, there we have it.
Correct. It will be the decent thing to do. It will take quite a few years to become the norm, but it will be progress. It's hard to see it from this end of history's telescope.
Of these witnesses, 8 are supporters from other jurisdictions. There are no opponents. Of the 9 lawyers called, 6 are in favour of the Bill and 3 neutral. Again there are no opponents.
This is outrageous.
There's this too.
See the long list of witnesses. There will be many who will be disappointed to not make the list but it looks comprehensive to me.
The Committee has started its work and the amendments are open to public view. I think they have made a good start. I support the Sarah Olney amendment. But there are many more public meetings and expert witnesses to come. It's going to be a thorough process.
The ‘objectively impressive and rigourous’ list of witnesses, contains no-one who opposes the Bill. None of the lawyers called to appear oppose the Bill either. The Committee is hearing only one side of the argument.
Have you checked the list of witnesses to see if it contains anyone who opposes the bill?
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
Several posters on here, myself included, have said we are in favour of the principle of assisted dying but we have huge concerns about the approach being taken by Kim Leadbetter, that’s what you should be focussing on.
In my career the best way I have won people over is by showing my workings to them, not doing things hidden in the shadows.
See my post at 3.14pm.
How would you change the approach to bring in this proposed law?
By having a vigorous debate.
My concern is that people will go for assisted dying for financial reasons or that they are pressured into it.
Assisted dying should be safe, legal, and rare, with Kim Leadbetter’s approach it won’t be the third adjective.
Should it be rare? It should be as common as it is needed.
I am hoping for medical improvements so the quality of life is improved so we don’t get these diseases that make people want to end their lives.
That's a lovely wish. I'm not certain it's a safe expectation. The better medicine gets, often the better medicine gets at extending life without extending quality of life.
But hopefully we can see a shift in medical research to better address quality of life.
I'm not looking to hurt Russia. I love the Russian people, and always had a very good relationship with President Putin - and this despite the Radical Left's Russia, Russia, Russia HOAX. We must never forget that Russia helped us win the Second World War, losing almost 60,000,000 lives in the process. All of that being said, I'm going to do Russia, whose Economy is failing, and President Putin, a very big FAVOR. Settle now, and STOP this ridiculous War! IT'S ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE. If we don't make a "deal," and soon, I have no other choice but to put high levels of Taxes, Tariffs, and Sanctions on anything being sold by Russia to the United States, and various other participating countries. Let's get this war, which never would have started if I were President, over with! We can do it the easy way, or the hard way - and the easy way is always better. It's time to "MAKE A DEAL." NO MORE LIVES SHOULD BE LOST!!!
The guy is nuts/stupid. There are already very extensive US sanctions against Russia such that there is very, very little “being sold by Russia to the United States”. Tariffs are therefore pointless.
US imports from Russia, 2021: $29,600M 2024: $2,900M (but that figure is missing December)
He's neither nuts nor stupid. He's the supreme politician of our era. The closest thing to Bismarck we have today.
‘A Bismark is a raised doughnut filled with jelly or jam’
Fair enough.
JFK did call himself a doughnut, more like the round kind with jam all inside. Not sure what the difference is.
In JFK's case, it was a grammatical error, while in Trump's...
Going to be a tight day on power generation. Demand high, but wind remains at only 1%. Solar 4% and dropping. Even got the OCGT out for 1%. Gas very high still, as it has been for days/weeks. Same with burning trees.
Demand will be very high on the continent, with low winds, so any imported electricity will be very expensive and restrictive.
Will be interesting to see how close we get to keeping the lights and at what price.
Can't we always import electricity from other countries, even if we have to pay a lot for it?
The UK has a about 6.4GW of interconnectors: 1.4GW to Norway 1GW to the Netherlands 1GW to Ireland 3GW to France
So, no we can't buy all the electricity we need from abroad, although we can buy a fair amount.
That being said, this is about as bad as it gets for UK electricity supply. There's little wind, and we have the combination of short days and cloud cover affecting solar electricity production.
To add to this, we have four nuclear reactors either offline, or running significantly below boiler plate capacity:
Two reactors at Heysham 2 are offline, one where summer maintenance needed to be brought forward and the other completely unscheduled and offline. Heysham 1 is also currently being refuelled and is therefore offline. And finally, Hartlepool is offline due to a condensate leak.
Of these four outages, only one was planned to happen over the winter period: Heysham 1 fueling. (And candidly, they should have done it earlier so it didn't coincide with peak electricity and trough insolation.)
Without the nuclear issues, we'd be doing fine. Even with them, we're OK. But I wouldn't want to see another nuclear plant go offline.
Just to add: Heysham 1 refuelling is due to complete tomorrow, and that's a 1.1GW plant, so when it comes back online that will make a big difference.
How would the layman find this news, Is there an aggregator for UK energy chat?
Wind is obviously totally unreliable - exactly what you don't need for electricity supply.
Coal is looking more and more attractive - abundant globally, cheap, proven and reliable. We should stop rigging the market in favour of renewables, or unreliables as I call them, and see what energy sources it chooses, as we did in the 90s. My guess would be some combination of gas, coal and nuclear.
Tide is totally reliable.
Coal is dirty, difficult to extract and contributes to global warming. The previous government got a lot wrong but phasing out coals was one of the few things it got right.
Anyone else remember the debate on PB about whether extracting energy from the tides would lead to changes in the moon-earth relationship in (relatively) short time scales? Halcyon days.
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
That might be your opinion but the header is very clearly about the process that is happening around the bill and is on the money,
David Steel's Abortion Act 1967 was brought in using a very similar process as a Private Member's Bill.
Because it is a matter of personal belief, it is very difficult for it to be a Government Bill.
In fact it would be inappropriate for it to be a Government Bill with whipping.
This was the only way to introduce it. The Committee will now examine it to improve it. I hope they take judges out of the process as they have no useful role.
Objections to the process mask objections to the principle.
The Abortion Act is almost the dictionary definition of the slippery slope.
A quarter of a million abortions in England and Wales in 2022, the last year for which statistics are available, up more than 25% in the last decade alone.
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
Several posters on here, myself included, have said we are in favour of the principle of assisted dying but we have huge concerns about the approach being taken by Kim Leadbetter, that’s what you should be focussing on.
In my career the best way I have won people over is by showing my workings to them, not doing things hidden in the shadows.
See my post at 3.14pm.
How would you change the approach to bring in this proposed law?
By having a vigorous debate.
My concern is that people will go for assisted dying for financial reasons or that they are pressured into it.
Assisted dying should be safe, legal, and rare, with Kim Leadbetter’s approach it won’t be the third adjective.
Why should it be rare? In years to come, I hope it will be the norm. When you have no quality of life, blocking a bed, using up your kids inheritance, it will be natural, but not compulsory, to end your life.
Assisted dying should be minimised by minimising the number of people suffering severe pain and life reducing illness due to their being unable to receive appropriate, timely, medical treatment. If the NU10K weren’t able to beat the system by paying for private treatment, perhaps there would be more effort made to help the other (69 million -10K) people.
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
Several posters on here, myself included, have said we are in favour of the principle of assisted dying but we have huge concerns about the approach being taken by Kim Leadbetter, that’s what you should be focussing on.
In my career the best way I have won people over is by showing my workings to them, not doing things hidden in the shadows.
See my post at 3.14pm.
How would you change the approach to bring in this proposed law?
By having a vigorous debate.
My concern is that people will go for assisted dying for financial reasons or that they are pressured into it.
Assisted dying should be safe, legal, and rare, with Kim Leadbetter’s approach it won’t be the third adjective.
Why should it be rare? In years to come, I hope it will be the norm. When you have no quality of life, blocking a bed, using up your kids inheritance, it will be natural, but not compulsory, to end your life.
And, there we have it.
Correct. It will be the decent thing to do. It will take quite a few years to become the norm, but it will be progress. It's hard to see it from this end of history's telescope.
I think we have very different notions of decency and progress.
Of these witnesses, 8 are supporters from other jurisdictions. There are no opponents. Of the 9 lawyers called, 6 are in favour of the Bill and 3 neutral. Again there are no opponents.
This is outrageous.
There's this too.
See the long list of witnesses. There will be many who will be disappointed to not make the list but it looks comprehensive to me.
The Committee has started its work and the amendments are open to public view. I think they have made a good start. I support the Sarah Olney amendment. But there are many more public meetings and expert witnesses to come. It's going to be a thorough process.
The ‘objectively impressive and rigourous’ list of witnesses, contains no-one who opposes the Bill. None of the lawyers called to appear oppose the Bill either. The Committee is hearing only one side of the argument.
Have you checked the list of witnesses to see if it contains anyone who opposes the bill?
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
That might be your opinion but the header is very clearly about the process that is happening around the bill and is on the money,
David Steel's Abortion Act 1967 was brought in using a very similar process as a Private Member's Bill.
Because it is a matter of personal belief, it is very difficult for it to be a Government Bill.
In fact it would be inappropriate for it to be a Government Bill with whipping.
This was the only way to introduce it. The Committee will now examine it to improve it. I hope they take judges out of the process as they have no useful role.
Objections to the process mask objections to the principle.
The Abortion Act is almost the dictionary definition of the slippery slope.
A quarter of a million abortions in England and Wales in 2022, the last year for which statistics are available, up more than 25% in the last decade alone.
How is that a slippery slope? That's what the people behind the Act planned.
Which is why this Bill is so pernicious.
When the Abortion Act now results in 250k abortions vs 600k births, we can likely summise that this Bill might produce a similar result in deaths a few years down the line…
Those figures are incomplete. 600k births and 250k induced abortions implies maybe 900k spontaneous abortions/failures to implant. If God puts souls in at the moment of conception, God takes those souls back far more himself than any human intervention.
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
That might be your opinion but the header is very clearly about the process that is happening around the bill and is on the money,
David Steel's Abortion Act 1967 was brought in using a very similar process as a Private Member's Bill.
Because it is a matter of personal belief, it is very difficult for it to be a Government Bill.
In fact it would be inappropriate for it to be a Government Bill with whipping.
This was the only way to introduce it. The Committee will now examine it to improve it. I hope they take judges out of the process as they have no useful role.
Objections to the process mask objections to the principle.
The Abortion Act is almost the dictionary definition of the slippery slope.
A quarter of a million abortions in England and Wales in 2022, the last year for which statistics are available, up more than 25% in the last decade alone.
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
Several posters on here, myself included, have said we are in favour of the principle of assisted dying but we have huge concerns about the approach being taken by Kim Leadbetter, that’s what you should be focussing on.
In my career the best way I have won people over is by showing my workings to them, not doing things hidden in the shadows.
See my post at 3.14pm.
How would you change the approach to bring in this proposed law?
By having a vigorous debate.
My concern is that people will go for assisted dying for financial reasons or that they are pressured into it.
Assisted dying should be safe, legal, and rare, with Kim Leadbetter’s approach it won’t be the third adjective.
Should it be rare? It should be as common as it is needed.
I am hoping for medical improvements so the quality of life is improved so we don’t get these diseases that make people want to end their lives.
That's a lovely wish. I'm not certain it's a safe expectation. The better medicine gets, often the better medicine gets at extending life without extending quality of life.
But hopefully we can see a shift in medical research to better address quality of life.
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
Several posters on here, myself included, have said we are in favour of the principle of assisted dying but we have huge concerns about the approach being taken by Kim Leadbetter, that’s what you should be focussing on.
In my career the best way I have won people over is by showing my workings to them, not doing things hidden in the shadows.
See my post at 3.14pm.
How would you change the approach to bring in this proposed law?
By having a vigorous debate.
My concern is that people will go for assisted dying for financial reasons or that they are pressured into it.
Assisted dying should be safe, legal, and rare, with Kim Leadbetter’s approach it won’t be the third adjective.
Why should it be rare? In years to come, I hope it will be the norm. When you have no quality of life, blocking a bed, using up your kids inheritance, it will be natural, but not compulsory, to end your life.
And, there we have it.
Correct. It will be the decent thing to do. It will take quite a few years to become the norm, but it will be progress. It's hard to see it from this end of history's telescope.
I think we have very different notions of decency and progress.
Cultures change over time. Look back at attitudes to slavery, women's vote, gay rights.
I know I'm ahead of the curve. I'm surprised Leon isn't with me on this.
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
Several posters on here, myself included, have said we are in favour of the principle of assisted dying but we have huge concerns about the approach being taken by Kim Leadbetter, that’s what you should be focussing on.
In my career the best way I have won people over is by showing my workings to them, not doing things hidden in the shadows.
See my post at 3.14pm.
How would you change the approach to bring in this proposed law?
By having a vigorous debate.
My concern is that people will go for assisted dying for financial reasons or that they are pressured into it.
Assisted dying should be safe, legal, and rare, with Kim Leadbetter’s approach it won’t be the third adjective.
Why should it be rare? In years to come, I hope it will be the norm. When you have no quality of life, blocking a bed, using up your kids inheritance, it will be natural, but not compulsory, to end your life.
Assisted dying should be minimised by minimising the number of people suffering severe pain and life reducing illness due to their being unable to receive appropriate, timely, medical treatment. If the NU10K weren’t able to beat the system by paying for private treatment, perhaps there would be more effort made to help the other (69 million -10K) people.
Everyone dies (present company excepted). Even with the best medical treatment, some people will always face slow, painful deaths. That's how human lives often end.
Barnesian is not doing their cause any good. Supporters of the bill ought to understand it's huge significance and there ought to be proper parliamentary scrutiny and debate.
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
That might be your opinion but the header is very clearly about the process that is happening around the bill and is on the money,
David Steel's Abortion Act 1967 was brought in using a very similar process as a Private Member's Bill.
Because it is a matter of personal belief, it is very difficult for it to be a Government Bill.
In fact it would be inappropriate for it to be a Government Bill with whipping.
This was the only way to introduce it. The Committee will now examine it to improve it. I hope they take judges out of the process as they have no useful role.
Objections to the process mask objections to the principle.
The Abortion Act is almost the dictionary definition of the slippery slope.
A quarter of a million abortions in England and Wales in 2022, the last year for which statistics are available, up more than 25% in the last decade alone.
How is that a slippery slope? That's what the people behind the Act planned.
Which is why this Bill is so pernicious.
When the Abortion Act now results in 250k abortions vs 600k births, we can likely summise that this Bill might produce a similar result in deaths a few years down the line…
Those figures are incomplete. 600k births and 250k induced abortions implies maybe 900k spontaneous abortions/failures to implant. If God puts souls in at the moment of conception, God takes those souls back far more himself than any human intervention.
God takes us all back eventually, doesn’t mean than we don’t frown upon people killing each other.
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
That might be your opinion but the header is very clearly about the process that is happening around the bill and is on the money,
David Steel's Abortion Act 1967 was brought in using a very similar process as a Private Member's Bill.
Because it is a matter of personal belief, it is very difficult for it to be a Government Bill.
In fact it would be inappropriate for it to be a Government Bill with whipping.
This was the only way to introduce it. The Committee will now examine it to improve it. I hope they take judges out of the process as they have no useful role.
Objections to the process mask objections to the principle.
The Abortion Act is almost the dictionary definition of the slippery slope.
A quarter of a million abortions in England and Wales in 2022, the last year for which statistics are available, up more than 25% in the last decade alone.
Not sure I would revoke it completely. I’d probably draw the line at giving morning after pills to rape victims.
No much logic in that... it's not the fertilized egg's fault it was the result of a rape.
Both of these issues, abortion and assisted-dying, dip deep into unfathomable questions about what it is to be human, what is life, etc. There are no rights and wrongs, everybody is entitled to their own views and to have those views respected.
The problem is that for some people - those seeking an abortion or assisted-dying - the answer has a tangible impact.
Jamie Dimon, JPMorgan Chase’s chief executive, repeatedly warned about tariffs during President Trump’s first term…Now, two days into Mr. Trump’s second term, Mr. Dimon has called tariffs a valuable “economic weapon.”
“If it’s a little inflationary, but it’s good for national security — so be it,” Mr. Dimon told CNBC on Wednesday from the World Economic Forum’s annual conference in Davos, Switzerland. “Get over it,” he added.
Going to be a tight day on power generation. Demand high, but wind remains at only 1%. Solar 4% and dropping. Even got the OCGT out for 1%. Gas very high still, as it has been for days/weeks. Same with burning trees.
Demand will be very high on the continent, with low winds, so any imported electricity will be very expensive and restrictive.
Will be interesting to see how close we get to keeping the lights and at what price.
Can't we always import electricity from other countries, even if we have to pay a lot for it?
The UK has a about 6.4GW of interconnectors: 1.4GW to Norway 1GW to the Netherlands 1GW to Ireland 3GW to France
So, no we can't buy all the electricity we need from abroad, although we can buy a fair amount.
That being said, this is about as bad as it gets for UK electricity supply. There's little wind, and we have the combination of short days and cloud cover affecting solar electricity production.
To add to this, we have four nuclear reactors either offline, or running significantly below boiler plate capacity:
Two reactors at Heysham 2 are offline, one where summer maintenance needed to be brought forward and the other completely unscheduled and offline. Heysham 1 is also currently being refuelled and is therefore offline. And finally, Hartlepool is offline due to a condensate leak.
Of these four outages, only one was planned to happen over the winter period: Heysham 1 fueling. (And candidly, they should have done it earlier so it didn't coincide with peak electricity and trough insolation.)
Without the nuclear issues, we'd be doing fine. Even with them, we're OK. But I wouldn't want to see another nuclear plant go offline.
Just to add: Heysham 1 refuelling is due to complete tomorrow, and that's a 1.1GW plant, so when it comes back online that will make a big difference.
How would the layman find this news, Is there an aggregator for UK energy chat?
Wind is obviously totally unreliable - exactly what you don't need for electricity supply.
Coal is looking more and more attractive - abundant globally, cheap, proven and reliable. We should stop rigging the market in favour of renewables, or unreliables as I call them, and see what energy sources it chooses, as we did in the 90s. My guess would be some combination of gas, coal and nuclear.
That's simply not true.
The coal price fluctuates just as much as the gas price; plants are much more maintenance heavy; and they are very slow to spin up and slow down.
There's a reason why - even in red states in the US - coal plants are being retired.
Plus even if you remove all government incentives around renewables, people are going to keep putting panels on their rooves. And the more solar there is in the system, the more power demand varies, and the less attractive coal becomes. Because more solar (and there will only ever be more solar in terms of grid supply) means more volatile electricity prices. And what do you do with that coal plant when the price of electricity is zero?
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
That might be your opinion but the header is very clearly about the process that is happening around the bill and is on the money,
David Steel's Abortion Act 1967 was brought in using a very similar process as a Private Member's Bill.
Because it is a matter of personal belief, it is very difficult for it to be a Government Bill.
In fact it would be inappropriate for it to be a Government Bill with whipping.
This was the only way to introduce it. The Committee will now examine it to improve it. I hope they take judges out of the process as they have no useful role.
Objections to the process mask objections to the principle.
The Abortion Act is almost the dictionary definition of the slippery slope.
A quarter of a million abortions in England and Wales in 2022, the last year for which statistics are available, up more than 25% in the last decade alone.
How is that a slippery slope? That's what the people behind the Act planned.
Which is why this Bill is so pernicious.
When the Abortion Act now results in 250k abortions vs 600k births, we can likely summise that this Bill might produce a similar result in deaths a few years down the line…
I wouldn't think quite so high, but 5% or so is possible. It is 3.4% in the Netherlands 20 years after euthanasia was legalised.
I wouldn't want it, and I think there are a lot of misconceptions about End of Life care short of euthanasia. I would like to see this given more prominence as a possibility. I think euthanasia is wide open to abuse by budding Shipmans and Letby's, and by grasping and manipulative relatives.
Nonetheless I would be happy for it to become law, as I don't want to impose my views on others. I just want robust safeguards.
Jamie Dimon, JPMorgan Chase’s chief executive, repeatedly warned about tariffs during President Trump’s first term…Now, two days into Mr. Trump’s second term, Mr. Dimon has called tariffs a valuable “economic weapon.”
“If it’s a little inflationary, but it’s good for national security — so be it,” Mr. Dimon told CNBC on Wednesday from the World Economic Forum’s annual conference in Davos, Switzerland. “Get over it,” he added.
Jamie Dimon, JPMorgan Chase’s chief executive, repeatedly warned about tariffs during President Trump’s first term…Now, two days into Mr. Trump’s second term, Mr. Dimon has called tariffs a valuable “economic weapon.”
“If it’s a little inflationary, but it’s good for national security — so be it,” Mr. Dimon told CNBC on Wednesday from the World Economic Forum’s annual conference in Davos, Switzerland. “Get over it,” he added.
"These are my principles - if you don't like them, I have others."
Barnesian is not doing their cause any good. Supporters of the bill ought to understand it's huge significance and there ought to be proper parliamentary scrutiny and debate.
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
Several posters on here, myself included, have said we are in favour of the principle of assisted dying but we have huge concerns about the approach being taken by Kim Leadbetter, that’s what you should be focussing on.
In my career the best way I have won people over is by showing my workings to them, not doing things hidden in the shadows.
See my post at 3.14pm.
How would you change the approach to bring in this proposed law?
By having a vigorous debate.
My concern is that people will go for assisted dying for financial reasons or that they are pressured into it.
Assisted dying should be safe, legal, and rare, with Kim Leadbetter’s approach it won’t be the third adjective.
Why should it be rare? In years to come, I hope it will be the norm. When you have no quality of life, blocking a bed, using up your kids inheritance, it will be natural, but not compulsory, to end your life.
And, there we have it.
Correct. It will be the decent thing to do. It will take quite a few years to become the norm, but it will be progress. It's hard to see it from this end of history's telescope.
“The decent thing to do” will be to end your life ten years early so you “aren’t a bed blocker” and you aren’t “wasting your kids inheritance” with all that breathing and living you do
The most eager proponents of this bill are its biggest enemies
I'm not looking to hurt Russia. I love the Russian people, and always had a very good relationship with President Putin - and this despite the Radical Left's Russia, Russia, Russia HOAX. We must never forget that Russia helped us win the Second World War, losing almost 60,000,000 lives in the process. All of that being said, I'm going to do Russia, whose Economy is failing, and President Putin, a very big FAVOR. Settle now, and STOP this ridiculous War! IT'S ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE. If we don't make a "deal," and soon, I have no other choice but to put high levels of Taxes, Tariffs, and Sanctions on anything being sold by Russia to the United States, and various other participating countries. Let's get this war, which never would have started if I were President, over with! We can do it the easy way, or the hard way - and the easy way is always better. It's time to "MAKE A DEAL." NO MORE LIVES SHOULD BE LOST!!!
The guy is nuts/stupid. There are already very extensive US sanctions against Russia such that there is very, very little “being sold by Russia to the United States”. Tariffs are therefore pointless.
US imports from Russia, 2021: $29,600M 2024: $2,900M (but that figure is missing December)
"and various other participating countries"
Sanctions against Russia's suppliers is what you've missed here.
It does read like something written by someone who hasn't bothered to find out even the most basic facts. Which is maybe goodish news, as he can probably be persuaded that almost any course is the right one. Just have to get some shameless flatterer to persuade him that he's the only guy who ever dared stand up to Putin.
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
Several posters on here, myself included, have said we are in favour of the principle of assisted dying but we have huge concerns about the approach being taken by Kim Leadbetter, that’s what you should be focussing on.
In my career the best way I have won people over is by showing my workings to them, not doing things hidden in the shadows.
See my post at 3.14pm.
How would you change the approach to bring in this proposed law?
By having a vigorous debate.
My concern is that people will go for assisted dying for financial reasons or that they are pressured into it.
Assisted dying should be safe, legal, and rare, with Kim Leadbetter’s approach it won’t be the third adjective.
Why should it be rare? In years to come, I hope it will be the norm. When you have no quality of life, blocking a bed, using up your kids inheritance, it will be natural, but not compulsory, to end your life.
And, there we have it.
Correct. It will be the decent thing to do. It will take quite a few years to become the norm, but it will be progress. It's hard to see it from this end of history's telescope.
I think we have very different notions of decency and progress.
Cultures change over time. Look back at attitudes to slavery, women's vote, gay rights.
I know I'm ahead of the curve. I'm surprised Leon isn't with me on this.
Sorry but that's just arrogance. Neither you nor I know what people in the future will think. And by the same logic why is it not okay to argue for sex with minors? After all, slavery, women's vote, gay rights were all considered wrong in the past. Isn't it about time we got past the age of consent taboo?
Jamie Dimon, JPMorgan Chase’s chief executive, repeatedly warned about tariffs during President Trump’s first term…Now, two days into Mr. Trump’s second term, Mr. Dimon has called tariffs a valuable “economic weapon.”
“If it’s a little inflationary, but it’s good for national security — so be it,” Mr. Dimon told CNBC on Wednesday from the World Economic Forum’s annual conference in Davos, Switzerland. “Get over it,” he added.
"These are my principles - if you don't like them, I have others."
Most of the oligarchs are falling into line. Turns out they are greedy cowards. Though this guy's only worth 3 billion, does that count as an oligarchs, or just a wannabe?
Jamie Dimon, JPMorgan Chase’s chief executive, repeatedly warned about tariffs during President Trump’s first term…Now, two days into Mr. Trump’s second term, Mr. Dimon has called tariffs a valuable “economic weapon.”
“If it’s a little inflationary, but it’s good for national security — so be it,” Mr. Dimon told CNBC on Wednesday from the World Economic Forum’s annual conference in Davos, Switzerland. “Get over it,” he added.
"These are my principles - if you don't like them, I have others."
Dimon’s next up for the Zuckerberg award for arse-licking the new President, in the vain hope that his own scumbag business practices over the years might escape the scrutiny that’s coming from the Federal government.
I'm not looking to hurt Russia. I love the Russian people, and always had a very good relationship with President Putin - and this despite the Radical Left's Russia, Russia, Russia HOAX. We must never forget that Russia helped us win the Second World War, losing almost 60,000,000 lives in the process. All of that being said, I'm going to do Russia, whose Economy is failing, and President Putin, a very big FAVOR. Settle now, and STOP this ridiculous War! IT'S ONLY GOING TO GET WORSE. If we don't make a "deal," and soon, I have no other choice but to put high levels of Taxes, Tariffs, and Sanctions on anything being sold by Russia to the United States, and various other participating countries. Let's get this war, which never would have started if I were President, over with! We can do it the easy way, or the hard way - and the easy way is always better. It's time to "MAKE A DEAL." NO MORE LIVES SHOULD BE LOST!!!
The guy is nuts/stupid. There are already very extensive US sanctions against Russia such that there is very, very little “being sold by Russia to the United States”. Tariffs are therefore pointless.
US imports from Russia, 2021: $29,600M 2024: $2,900M (but that figure is missing December)
He's neither nuts nor stupid. He's the supreme politician of our era. The closest thing to Bismarck we have today.
The Bismarck who introduced he world's first welfare state?
Jamie Dimon, JPMorgan Chase’s chief executive, repeatedly warned about tariffs during President Trump’s first term…Now, two days into Mr. Trump’s second term, Mr. Dimon has called tariffs a valuable “economic weapon.”
“If it’s a little inflationary, but it’s good for national security — so be it,” Mr. Dimon told CNBC on Wednesday from the World Economic Forum’s annual conference in Davos, Switzerland. “Get over it,” he added.
"These are my principles - if you don't like them, I have others."
Most of the oligarchs are falling into line. Turns out they are greedy cowards. Though this guy's only worth 3 billion, does that count as an oligarchs, or just a wannabe?
Trump hasn't just won the election; he's won the argument.
The post-Cold War consensus on open borders - both for trade and migration - has been disastrous for the cohesion of western societies. Even the rich can't escape from the dysfunction it has caused.
Spent the entire day at my mother in law's funeral. Quite moving, even for someone like me, who is agnostic on a good day.
She was facing life in a home, an ever more incomprehensible world and the loss of all the facets of her personality that made her who she was. As usual, she got her own way. I am pleased for her but as I have pointed out before the dilemmas she faced showed the utter irrelevance of this rather silly and ill thought out bill. It is gesture politics at its worst.
OK so Cyclefree is against assisted dying and is part of the campaign to kick it into the long grass and kill it.
I have been to meet with my MP, who is on the Committee and is against the Bill, to change her mind.
I don't think the Bill goes far enough and is far too restrictive. Hopefully, once it is passed, its scope can be further expanded by further legislation in the years to come. A progressive ladder not a slippery slope.
In a generation of so, people will look back in amazement that it took so long to give people the right to manage their own death. Just as we now look back in amazement at the time it took to give women the right to vote or gays the righ to marry.
Fingers crossed this bill will pass.
Cyclefree is no part of any campaign, she is expressing her sincerely held views.
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
It is clear that Cyclefree is against assisted dying full stop for her own personal reasons. I suspect she would be against it, whatever the process. It's her own campaign.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
Several posters on here, myself included, have said we are in favour of the principle of assisted dying but we have huge concerns about the approach being taken by Kim Leadbetter, that’s what you should be focussing on.
In my career the best way I have won people over is by showing my workings to them, not doing things hidden in the shadows.
See my post at 3.14pm.
How would you change the approach to bring in this proposed law?
By having a vigorous debate.
My concern is that people will go for assisted dying for financial reasons or that they are pressured into it.
Assisted dying should be safe, legal, and rare, with Kim Leadbetter’s approach it won’t be the third adjective.
Why should it be rare? In years to come, I hope it will be the norm. When you have no quality of life, blocking a bed, using up your kids inheritance, it will be natural, but not compulsory, to end your life.
And, there we have it.
Correct. It will be the decent thing to do. It will take quite a few years to become the norm, but it will be progress. It's hard to see it from this end of history's telescope.
I think we have very different notions of decency and progress.
Cultures change over time. Look back at attitudes to slavery, women's vote, gay rights.
I know I'm ahead of the curve. I'm surprised Leon isn't with me on this.
Cultures don't have a natural progression toward some objective enlightenment. People now have to push for things, and much of that will be good, and some will not, I don't see that as being controversial - people complain about something in society they do not like all the time, it is not really any different.
We also hear about things like epidemics of personal loneliness or less family connections with smaller and more remote families, to name two potential cultural changes from the past which are probably less divisive, as things which may be negative to us.
So for one not every change is progress, things can go backwards, and for two, it is actually possible to resist or modulate potential changes if society wants, it is not inevitable that attitudes will change. Fair enough people have very different views on this particular subject and what they think is moral to try to change, but 'knowing' it will change, right side of history stuff, is problematic.
But I often reflect on what we regard as normal now which will in future be regarded with disgust or horror. It surely will not be nothing.
Comments
Meanwhile Twitter and Youtube got the numbers. https://x.com/defiyantlyfree/status/1881929264569651244
I am more than happy to consider pieces from yourself or anyone else who is in favour of this bill for publication on PB.
Coal is dirty, difficult to extract and contributes to global warming. The previous government got a lot wrong but phasing out coal generation was one of the few things it got right.
https://egypt.mfa.gov.ua/en/news/65792-roly-ukrajinsykogo-narodu-u-peremozi-nad-nacizmom
Fair enough.
A large majority of the population, of all ages and parties, are in favour of assisted dying.
"Three-quarters (75%) of UK adults supported making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying, while only 14% actively opposed such a change." Opinium.
https://www.opinium.com/resource-center/will-public-opinion-translate-into-legislative-change/
Majority support is no argument for or against a proposition.
Cyclefree’s arguments are extremely cogent, and if you believe that those arguments are wrong, then you need to make a case that they are wrong.
In my career the best way I have won people over is by showing my workings to them, not doing things hidden in the shadows.
See my post at 3.14pm.
Because it is a matter of personal belief, it is very difficult for it to be a Government Bill.
In fact it would be inappropriate for it to be a Government Bill with whipping.
This was the only way to introduce it. The Committee will now examine it to improve it. I hope they take judges out of the process as they have no useful role.
Objections to the process mask objections to the principle.
The Committee has started its work and the amendments are open to public view. I think they have made a good start. I support the Sarah Olney amendment. But there are many more public meetings and expert witnesses to come. It's going to be a thorough process.
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/59-01/0012/amend/terminally_ill_adults_day_pbc_0121.pdf
If you are opposed in principle you probably don't mind this.
That would be a great evil. The state giving itself powers to kill peacetime civilians is a momentous thing. Which needs serious and proper debate
As does the state giving itself powers to enable and facilitate suicide
A quarter of a million abortions in England and Wales in 2022, the last year for which statistics are available, up more than 25% in the last decade alone.
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/abortion-statistics-for-england-and-wales-2022/abortion-statistics-england-and-wales-2022
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/59-01/0012/amend/terminally_ill_adults_day_pbc_0121.pdf
I just have, and it contains the name of Barbara Rich who vehemently opposes the Bill and was referred to earlier by TSE.
Sanctions against Russia's suppliers is what you've missed here.
My concern is that people will go for assisted dying for financial reasons or that they are pressured into it.
Assisted dying should be safe, legal, and rare, with Kim Leadbetter’s approach it won’t be the third adjective.
Listening to one side of an argument rarely ends well.
Some people believe that their cause is so self-evidently righteous that it does not require scrutiny.
When you have no quality of life, blocking a bed, using up your kids inheritance, it will be natural, but not compulsory, to end your life.
This is the penultimate line of his obit (in The Guardian) which followed a brief description of his bankruptcies:
"In 2013 a landlord sold the contents of a loft space in upstate New York which had been used for storage and on which rent had not been paid for seven years; the items included handwritten sheet music and an uncashed royalty cheque for $26,000 dating from 1979."
Evidently a life well lived.
So are we at one out of seventeen opposed?
Always been dubious since a 6th form trip to a magnox, when I asked how much electricity it was producing we were told it couldn't export to the grid because "one of the turbines was out for maintenance so the other was spinning too fast", lights were on though...
Or one member of the Committee has made a disparaging remark?
I can't find a record of that. It may be so. I'm sure there will be disparaging remarks made on both sides. It's hardly a killer point.
When the Abortion Act now results in 250k abortions vs 600k births, we can likely summise that this Bill might produce a similar result in deaths a few years down the line…
It's hard to see it from this end of history's telescope.
But hopefully we can see a shift in medical research to better address quality of life.
Many rape victims do not go to the authorities, or doctors, until quite a while after the attack. Sometimes weeks.
The vast majority of the opponents would find something else to object to about it anyway. May as well have them distracted with procedural stuff.
I know I'm ahead of the curve. I'm surprised Leon isn't with me on this.
https://unherd.com/2025/01/the-criminal-pardoning-of-anthony-fauci/
Both of these issues, abortion and assisted-dying, dip deep into unfathomable questions about what it is to be human, what is life, etc. There are no rights and wrongs, everybody is entitled to their own views and to have those views respected.
The problem is that for some people - those seeking an abortion or assisted-dying - the answer has a tangible impact.
Jamie Dimon, JPMorgan Chase’s chief executive, repeatedly warned about tariffs during President Trump’s first term…Now, two days into Mr. Trump’s second term, Mr. Dimon has called tariffs a valuable “economic weapon.”
“If it’s a little inflationary, but it’s good for national security — so be it,” Mr. Dimon told CNBC on Wednesday from the World Economic Forum’s annual conference in Davos, Switzerland. “Get over it,” he added.
The coal price fluctuates just as much as the gas price; plants are much more maintenance heavy; and they are very slow to spin up and slow down.
There's a reason why - even in red states in the US - coal plants are being retired.
Plus even if you remove all government incentives around renewables, people are going to keep putting panels on their rooves. And the more solar there is in the system, the more power demand varies, and the less attractive coal becomes. Because more solar (and there will only ever be more solar in terms of grid supply) means more volatile electricity prices. And what do you do with that coal plant when the price of electricity is zero?
I wouldn't want it, and I think there are a lot of misconceptions about End of Life care short of euthanasia. I would like to see this given more prominence as a possibility. I think euthanasia is wide open to abuse by budding Shipmans and Letby's, and by grasping and manipulative relatives.
Nonetheless I would be happy for it to become law, as I don't want to impose my views on others. I just want robust safeguards.
PS Happy 10,000th post @FrankBooth!
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/59-01/0012/amend/terminally_ill_adults_day_pbc_0121.pdf
The most eager proponents of this bill are its biggest enemies
Does anyone proof read these days? This doesn't make sense.
The post-Cold War consensus on open borders - both for trade and migration - has been disastrous for the cohesion of western societies. Even the rich can't escape from the dysfunction it has caused.
She was facing life in a home, an ever more incomprehensible world and the loss of all the facets of her personality that made her who she was. As usual, she got her own way. I am pleased for her but as I have pointed out before the dilemmas she faced showed the utter irrelevance of this rather silly and ill thought out bill. It is gesture politics at its worst.
We also hear about things like epidemics of personal loneliness or less family connections with smaller and more remote families, to name two potential cultural changes from the past which are probably less divisive, as things which may be negative to us.
So for one not every change is progress, things can go backwards, and for two, it is actually possible to resist or modulate potential changes if society wants, it is not inevitable that attitudes will change. Fair enough people have very different views on this particular subject and what they think is moral to try to change, but 'knowing' it will change, right side of history stuff, is problematic.
But I often reflect on what we regard as normal now which will in future be regarded with disgust or horror. It surely will not be nothing.