Meeting of the Parliament 13 March 2026 [Draft]
I note the points that Mr Stewart made. I understand the sensitivities and the very strong views that there are on the matter. I rest on the points that I opened with, which I hope reassures him.
I begin my substantive discussion of the amendments in the group with amendment 247, which would place a significant onus—and, possibly, cost burden—on anyone who produces materials about assisted dying for members of the public to provide information on which they might not have the required expertise.
The Scottish Government has significant concerns about amendment 248. From a legal perspective, the provision would create an offence in relation to the way in which assisted dying was referred to in public communication over and above the offence that is already in the bill. It has potentially very wide reach, as the communication that is intended for members of the public would only have to refer to assisted dying. It is questionable whether that is a proportionate measure.
From a technical perspective, it is not clear how amendment 248 would interact with the exemptions that are set out in section 21A(4).
From a delivery perspective, like amendment 247, amendment 248 would place a significant onus on anyone producing materials around assisted dying for the general public to provide the information as set out in the amendment, on which they may not have the required expertise. It could place a significant cost burden on the production of information for the general public around assisted dying.
The Scottish Government has no comment on the remaining amendments in the group.