As chief executive of Involve, I welcome John Harris’s call for a citizens’ assembly on assisted dying to inform Kim Leadbeater’s private member’s bill on the topic (How can Britain plot its future when it is so deeply stuck in the mud? Empower the citizens, 20 October). There is a valuable precedent in Jersey that the new government could learn from. In 2021, Involve helped run a citizens’ jury on this issue for the government of Jersey, as part of its preparations for legislation. Politicians later followed the recommendations of the jury, which were to allow assisted dying, for people with a terminal illness, in certain circumstances.
The lesson here is not whether the Jersey jury voted to allow or prevent assisted dying. Rather, the example shows that we should give our decision-makers the tools they need to do their jobs properly and democratically. In Jersey, politicians understood the informed preference of the people, when given space and time to come to judgment. This enabled decision-makers to break the political deadlock on this complex, sensitive and contested issue.
I urge the new government to provide Kim Leadbeater with a similar resource. Typically, private members’ bills are given very little legislative time. For an issue of such significance, the government should give the bill the extra time it will need to be debated properly – and build in space and time for a citizens’ assembly as part of the process.
Sarah Castell
CEO, Involve
• While I entirely agree with John Harris’s call for citizens’ assemblies to decide difficult issues, I was disappointed by his side swipe at the Church of England. The presence of the bishops in the House of Lords is no more anomalous than the rest of that house, and I am sure they will speak and vote with their consciences, and demonstrate the same sort of split on the matter as their “shrunken flock” – which is actually much larger than their weekly attendance and includes those who rarely come to church, but still look to the church for some guidance on these matters.
The debates inside church are largely the same as those engaged in more widely, balancing the right to determine when your own life has become unbearable, and the vulnerability of those who might be “encouraged” to seek an early exit. In church, we have this debate within the framework of a belief in the sanctity of life, but differ on whether that sanctity is maintained or abused by requiring people to hold on to life to a bitter end. So, bring on the citizens’ assemblies. I trust that Anglicans won’t be excluded from participating.
Rev Nick Ross
Holy Trinity Church, Smethwick
• If I understand John Harris correctly, he suggests that 99 ordinary citizens are better able to make decisions about complex long-term issues than 650 MPs. Given that most challenges now fall into this category, the logical conclusion is to close down parliament and establish citizens’ assemblies to determine the direction of the country.
This makes sense given the moronic nature of an MP’s life at the national level, which denies them the opportunity to speak their mind or vote based on the merit of arguments, their own views, and those of their constituents. This is further exacerbated by a system that incentivises governments to think about short-term political cycles. Prioritising the issues for citizens’ assemblies can be undertaken by those who know best – the people of the country. I’m sure an app could be developed to manage that.
Bill Kingdom
Oxford
• Do you have a photograph you’d like to share with Guardian readers? If so, please click here to upload it. A selection will be published in our Readers’ best photographs galleries and in the print edition on Saturdays.
