Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Evan Harris (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Commons on Monday, 19 May 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [Lords].


Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [Lords]

I do not think that that is right, and I wanted to return to the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Southport (Dr. Pugh) in an intervention. The way in which science works is that before someone gets to the HFEA stage, they have to get funding. They must get ethical approval and they have a research proposal. That is a huge job. People's jobs depend on being able to get permission, and scientists apply to the HFEA only at an extremely late stage. It would be a scandal if they had public or charity funding and subsequently failed to get that permission. In many cases, there is an iterative process between the authority and scientists, and they do not get approval until the end of a long process. That is what Lord Winston and others, including those at Newcastle, complain about at length. They complain that the process is too burdensome; other hon. Members are now complaining that it is not burdensome enough. If no one is happy, that suggests that the authority has it about right. A walkover it is not.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
476 c50 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Children Clones Animals Congenital abnormalities Fertility Licensing Human embryo experiments Diseases Donors Genetics Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority Ethics IVF Foetal tissue Medical treatments Relatives Research Stem cells Human-animal hybrid embryos
Legislation
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill (HL) 2007-08
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk