Skip to main content

Written question asked by Ruth Kelly (Labour) on Wednesday, 6 December 2000, in the House of Commons. It was due for an answer on Tuesday, 12 December 2000. It was answered by Yvette Cooper (Labour) on Tuesday, 12 December 2000 on behalf of the Department of Health.


Dept of Health

Question
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what discussions his Department has had with (a) the bioscience industry, (b) religious organisations and (c) other interested groups on the recommendations of the Donaldson Report; and what was the outcome of these discussions.
Answer

Ms Kelly: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what discussions his Department has had with (a) the bioscience industry, (b) religious organisations and (c) other interested groups on the recommendations of the Donaldson Report; and what was the outcome of these discussions. [142039] Yvette Cooper: The Chief Medical Officer's expert group sought information on the scientific and ethical issues from a range of outside groups and individuals. The group considered written submissions from over 100 respondents from all sides of the debate. A list of responders is in the table. The outcome of these consultations is reflected in the recommendations made in the Donaldson Report. Since the finalisation of the report, officials from the Department have had discussions with a number of groups interested in this issue, mainly from medical, ethics and patient support backgrounds. A number of these groups have provided briefing to hon. Members on the recommendations contained in the Donaldson Report. List of respondents to CMO's consultation on therapeutic cloning _________________________________________________________________________________________________. Number Respondent identifier 1 Neurology Department University of Newcastle upon Tyne 2 Animal Reproduction and Biotechnology Laboratory-- Colorado State University, USA 3 E. Jones 4 The Data Protection Registrar 5 A. Robinson 6 R. Miller 7 Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine--Division of Developmental Genetics Baltimore, USA 8 Reproductive Genetics Unit--Department of Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Reproductive Sciences--University of California, San Francisco, USA 9 I. Barnes 10 P. Kemp 11 Medical Research Council--MRC 12 The Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh 13 Association of Medical Research Charities--AMRC 14 UCL/UCLH/NHNN Ethics Review Committee 15 M. McEwan-Reid 16 G. Spittles 17 M. Shamblott 18 J. Scotson 19 J. Boffey 20 Church of Ireland--The General Synod 21 R. Cheesewright 22 Quaker Ethics and Genetics Network 23 Duplicate 24 Reformed Presbyterian Church of Ireland--Committee on Public Morals 25 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. 26 European Bioethical Research 27 Centre for Bioethics and Public Policy 28 International Underwriting Association 29 Duplicate 30 P. Perry 31 Centre for Applied Ethics--Canterbury 32 Duplicate 33 Fund for the Replacement of Animals in Medical Experiments 34 Institute of Biology 35 Biological and Biotechnological Science Research Council-- BSRC 36 Catholic Bishops' Joint Committee on Bioethical Issues 37 International Right to Life Federation 38 E. King 39 M. Hobbs 40 F. Young 41 Department of Histochemistry--Imperial College School of Medicine 42 Centre for Early Human Development, Australia 43 PPL Therapeutics 44 Imperial Cancer Research Fund 45 Student LifeNet 46 J. Harvey 47 J. McCarthy 48 Department of Social Anthropology--Cambridge 49 Genetic Interest Group 50 B. Murray 51 R. Gilkison 52 M. Hendrickx 53 P. Houston 54 S. Tyler 55 Church of Scotland Society, Religion and Technology Project 56 J. Proom 57 L. Plant 58 C. Greeve 59 D. Morley 60 A. Baily 61 M. Arif 62 CAHGE--The Campaign Against Human Genetic Engineering 63 F. Pinto 64 Methodist Church--North Hertfordshire Circuit--Social Responsibility Committee 65 CORE--Comment on Reproductive Ethics 66 J. Bell 67 Medical Women's Federation 68 The Royal Society of Edinburgh 69 CARE--Christian Action Research & Education 70 BMA--British Medical Association 71 Theology Department--Chester College of Higher Education 72 SPUC--The Society for the Protection of Unborn Children 73 The Royal Society 74 Geron BioMed Ltd. 75 J. Hallett 76 W. Hansen 77 M. Grech-Marguerat 78 A. Burnett 79 D. Foley 80 T. Moris 81 E. Toye 82 D. Morley 83 R. Beale 84 F. Reid 85 S. Dias 86 C. Musgrave 87 M. Hobbs 88 M. Kelly 89 A. Clark 90 T. Harte 91 I. Benson 92 N. Smith 93 Centre for Genome Research--Edinburgh 94 Guild of Catholic Doctors 95 Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health 96 E. Souter 97 Wellcome CRC Institute 98 M. Sparshott 99 C. Bull 100 Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry 101 Special Parkinson's Research Interest Group 102 All-Party Parliamentary Pro-life Group 103 Australian Catholic Bishops Conference 104 D. Munroe 107 Name withheld LIFE _________________________________________________________________________________________________.


Secondary information

Type
Written question
Reference
359 c85-7W;359 c83-5W; 142039
Session
2000-01
Subjects
Biotechnology Human embryo experiments Ethics Religion
Link
View this Written question on www.publications.parliament.uk