Parliament has greenlit another season of its longest-running procedural drama: the assisted dying bill. A Labour MP has tabled an identical version to the last attempt, because apparently the script tested well with focus groups and the writers’ room decided continuity was overrated.
The pitch is familiar. The stakes are identical. The outcome remains unknowable. It’s like watching a streaming service renew a show that got cancelled twice, then act shocked when viewers ask why they’re watching the same episode again.
What distinguishes this reboot from the original? Absolutely nothing structural. Same moral arguments. Same religious objections. Same legal concerns about safeguards that either work perfectly or enable mass murder depending on which MP you ask. The only difference is the date on the bill and a fresh coat of “finish the job” rhetoric that sounds like a Marvel post-credits scene.
Parliament treats this like peak television because it genuinely is: emotionally exhausting, morally complex, and guaranteed to generate column inches whether anything changes. MPs get to vote their conscience, journalists get to write 8,000-word explainers, and the actual people waiting for an answer get to watch Westminster treat their lives like a seasonal renewal decision.
The bill will either pass or fail. If it fails, expect season four in 2029. If it passes, expect years of court challenges that feel exactly like this, but with different actors and better catering in the legal briefs.