IT is with a huge sense of responsibility that I approach the unfinished business of Margo MacDonald’s Assisted Suicide Bill.Today’s debate and vote in the Scottish Parliament chamber is crucial.

A range of witnesses, from legal and medical to care specialists, faith and campaigning groups, gave evidence to the Health Committee, whose report in turn made no recommendation to MSPs on how to vote.

I very much hope a majority of my parliamentary colleagues recognises that the basic argument posed by the Bill is sound. It’s about giving people choice and addressing the lack of clarity in the current law.

It’s limited to those with terminal or life-shortening conditions and who have decided that their quality of life has become unacceptable, and whose doctors agree that there is no prospect of improvement.

I am hopeful that Holyrood will support the principle of the Bill and allow the details to be debated further.It was a privilege working with Margo. She died after living with Parkinson’s Disease for many years.

She believed that if we face a terminal illness or a degenerative condition we should have the choice of control at the end of our life. I promised Margo I would present her Bill in the best way possible but that I would remain open to amendments to improve it.

The My Life, My Death, My Choice campaign supporting the Bill has worked hard to address some of the concerns that have been expressed. It has made clear that the use of the word “euthanasia” is misleading, as that is not what is being proposed. It would be for the individual to decide, through a series of discussions with their doctor.

And, in the end, it would be the individual who would take the drugs that would end their life.The Bill has wide support across Scottish society, among politicians, religious and legal figures. A significant majority of Scots supports the Bill according to opinion polls.

Balanced surveys, where both sides of the argument are presented, show that public support remains around the same level, at more than 65 per cent in favour of assisted suicide.On the issue of legal clarity, the Bill would provide for a well-defined and well-regulated system by which people can record their intentions and make a request for assistance.

That assistance to take control of the end of their life can be given in the knowledge that the person is acting out of free will. The law as it currently stands does not provide such clarity.Concerns have been raised that enabling assisted suicide risks reducing investment in palliative care but there is no evidence to support this.

High-quality care for those with complex illnesses is paramount. In other places where assisted suicide has been permitted we see no sign that it has prevented investment in these priorities.

Some have also worried about an increase in suicide rates but there is no evidence of this in places where assisted suicide has been brought in such as Belgium and the Netherlands.As MSPs consider which way to vote, I’m sure all of us will appreciate that we have constituents who believe their life is their own and they should have the right to make the choice enabled by this Bill if they find themselves with a condition with no prospect of improvement.

Since taking the Bill on from Margo I have strived to keep an open mind. I hope my parliamentary colleagues do the same, support the Bill at Stage 1 and allow the debate to continue.