Clause 17
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [Lords]
3:00 pm
Mark Simmonds (Shadow Minister, Health; Boston and Skegness, Conservative)
I beg to move amendment No. 142, in clause 17, page 12, line 23, at end insert—
‘(1A) In subsection (1)(b) for “equipment is” substitute “equipment and premises are”’.
Although the premises would have been inspected before the licence was granted or renewed, it is also important for the person responsible to ensure that the right equipment and parts of the premises are used for each procedure, and that there is no risk of cross-contamination between admixed embryos and IVF embryos, for example. On my visit to the Centre for Life in Newcastle I saw that it undertakes different types of medical research or treatment in separate parts of the same building. It is obviously the responsibility of the licence holder to ensure that there is no transfer or confusion between the two.
There is an inconsistency. There is no mention of equipment and premises in clause 17, yet in clause 18(d) and (e) they are mentioned as specific reasons for the potential revocation of the licence. Will the Minister explain that inconsistency?