SOLOMON HUGHES recommends Sunjeev Sahota’s recent novel set in a trade union election campaign for its fresh approach to what unites and divides workers, but wishes the union backdrop was truer to life
AS PREDICTED, the debate around the Assisted Dying Bill is framed by liberal politicians, the media and celebrities as one of “human rights” and “choice and autonomy.”
Where such legislation has been enacted, irrefutable evidence shows the original criteria that restricted “choice” to the terminally ill was quickly extended to those with non-terminal conditions, the disabled and mentally ill, those who consider themselves a “burden,” and those the neoliberal elite consider a burden on society — the poor and homeless.
Such concerns are airily dismissed by slick politicians who dishonestly claim the debate is about providing a “choice” between palliative care and assisted dying that all should be entitled to. Such lies. These people are perfectly aware the provision of palliative care, like all medical care, is in crisis due to lack of funding, research and development.
Evidence to peers from medical leaders, patient safety officials and the children’s commissioner has intensified fears that the Bill’s safeguards are inadequate, writes ADAM JAMES POLLOCK
DANIEL GOVER considers the procedural complexities awaiting a Private Member’s Bill in its passage through Commons and Lords



