Proceeding contribution from Baroness Hollis of Heigham (Labour) in the House of Lords on Monday, 4 February 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill on Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [HL].
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [HL]
My Lords, I am not sure whether technically I can do this. I want to ask a question of the noble Baroness before she sits down, but maybe she has already sat down. My question is not about whether one should support one or the other. My own instinct is to support all avenues of research because you cannot predict which will be the most fruitful long term. It is simply about whether I share her understanding of the import of paragraph (b) of proposed new subsection (6) which states: "““There is cogent evidence, which must include published, peer-reviewed scientific data””." Can the noble Baroness help me? On my reading, that would mean that you could never do research for the first time.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 698 c873
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Disclosure of information Codes of practice Fertility Licensing Human embryo experiments Diseases Donors Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority Ethics IVF Parents Regulation Registration of births, deaths, marriages and civil partnerships Research Stem cells
- Legislation
- Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill (HL) 2007-08
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-16 00:08:22 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_442263
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_442263
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_442263