MOST Fridays, Parliament doesn’t sit, and I spend the day back home working in Carlisle - meeting constituents and visiting schools, businesses and farms.

But last Friday was different. Last Friday I was in Westminster. But it wasn't a normal Westminster day either.

A normal day in Westminster is spent dashing between meetings and briefings, speaking in debates, scrutinising bills and secondary legislation - and of course voting.

Although bursting with MPs, Parliament was quiet and calm. You could hear the news helicopters buzzing overhead. No one was rushing between briefings and meetings.

Instead, most MPs were packed into the chamber of the House of Commons for an important and historic debate on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, which proposes to legalise assisted dying.

The emotional vote on assisted dying legislation was Parliament at its best, and I am reminded that we are fortunate to live in a democracy where we can debate and disagree respectfully.

Normally when Parliament votes, it divides along political party lines. But this vote was different - there were no party lines.

In fact, even the smaller parties like Reform had MPs voting in opposing lobbies.

I voted against the bill, for reasons I recently set out in a public letter to my constituents, published on my Facebook page and in this newspaper.  

The debate was serious and emotional, reflecting the tone of the emails and letters I have received on the subject from constituents, and in the public meeting I organised to listen to the different views from across Carlisle and north Cumbria.

Colleagues spoke about their experiences of loved ones who had a terminal prognosis.  

Many were overcome with emotion, and in turn many of us listening were moved to tears.

In the end there was a vote to progress with the bill, but it’s not possible to regard the outcome as win/lose. This issue transcended that.

The important thing now is that we move forwards together to effectively scrutinise the bill and ensure it provides the most robust protections, and that it works as proponents of the bill so sensitively outlined.