Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Barker (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Monday, 14 May 2007. It occurred during Debates on delegated legislation on Human Fertilisation and Embryology (Quality and Safety) Regulations 2007.


Human Fertilisation and Embryology (Quality and Safety) Regulations 2007

My Lords, we on these Benches welcome these regulations. As the noble Earl, Lord Howe, said—the Minister also alluded to this—we in this country already have a very highly established regulatory framework for these matters, much more so than in other parts of the European Union. It is in our interests to make sure that we maintain these high standards, which have contributed to making this country one of the premier places in the world to which scientists come in order to develop this particular type of work, not least because they find the regulatory framework here far more conducive to ethical development than they do in, for example, the United States of America. We on these Benches are delighted that in that respect, this European directive underpins and strengthens the position domestically. Also, it must reassure those individuals who will begin to secure tissues from abroad that they will be subject to exactly the same kinds of standards that one would expect here. I speak as somebody who is on record as being in favour of doing anything that we can—I feel strongly about this because of personal experience—to develop and increase the number of organ and tissue donations, such as corneas for people whose sight has deteriorated. I believe that the regulations set out a framework that will enhance that. I want to take one stage further the argument proposed by the noble Earl, Lord Howe, about the comparative financial burden on British firms. I accept his point that most of them are small or medium-sized enterprises. However, those firms must be in a far better position than their counterparts in other European countries, because they already have to meet many of the standards in the regulations. How long do the Government expect it to take before the directive is implemented fully across all member states? I have two questions for the Minister; he may not be able to answer them now, but I would be quite happy if he were to write to me. The first is about storage of traceability data, which are to be kept for 30 years. Why was that figure laid down in the regulations? I ask that not least because we know that the period of fertility for people is getting longer, so I wonder whether the figure has been determined recently. Secondly, I note the point about screening of donors for HIV, hepatitis B and C, syphilis and chlamydia, but this sentence worries me: "““Donors who, or whose sexual partners, come from high incident areas must also be screened for HTLV antibodies””." Why only people who have been in high-risk areas? Everything we know about such diseases shows that one has to be exposed only once to have a higher than average possibility of contracting the disease. Those are just two technical questions, but on the whole we welcome the regulations.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
692 c98-9 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Databases Costs Fertility Human embryo experiments Donors Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority IVF EU action NHS Medical records Standards Screening Regulation Transplant surgery Safety Research Human Tissue Authority
Legislation
Human Fertilisation and Embryology (Quality and Safety) Regulations 2007
Human Tissue (Quality and Safety for Human Application) Regulations 2007
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk