Proceeding contribution from Emily Thornberry (Labour) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 20 May 2008. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HC) and Debate on bill on Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [Lords].
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [Lords]
So, on the one hand, the Human Rights Act can deal with any problems that might arise as a result of the wording of the provision, but, on the other, the Act should not be the engine that is pushing the Government to change the law in order to avoid any doubt. The right hon. Gentleman has stated that there are 50 opinions for every lawyer who looks at this question, yet he is against trying to clarify the law.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 476 c175
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Children's rights Abortion Cohabitation Absent parents Counselling Women Fertility Homosexuality Human rights Human embryo experiments Eligibility IVF Discrimination Fathers Parents Married people Single people Women's rights
- Legislation
- Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill (HL) 2007-08
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2025-10-21 14:48:51 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_474360
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_474360
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_474360