Clause 60
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [Lords]
1:30 pm
John Pugh (Shadow Minister, Treasury; Southport, Liberal Democrat)
I beg to move amendment No. 152, in clause 60, page 50, line 1, leave out from ‘(2)’ to end of line 2 and insert
‘after “or human embryos”, insert “but includes human admixed embryos”.’.
I move the amendment on behalf of the right hon. Member for Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill (Mr. Clarke). It would incorporate human admixed embryos into the definition of genetically modified organisms in the Environmental Protection Act 1990 as organisms that need to be regulated in case of any foreseeable danger to the environment or dissemination of dangerous developments. Clause 60 specifically excludes human admixed embryos from the Act. Part 6 of the Act, which deals with genetically modified organisms, states that it exists
“for the purpose of preventing or minimising any damage to the environment which may arise from the escape or release from human control of genetically modified organisms.”
Section 106(2) says:
“In this Part the term ‘organism’ means any acellular, unicellular or multicellular entity...other than humans or human embryos”.
As I understand it, clause 60 adds to that “or human admixed embryos”. The amendment would change the wording to read:
“In this Part the term ‘organism’ means any acellular, unicellular or multicellular entity...other than humans or human embryos but includes human admixed embryos”.
The rationale came as much as anything else from that august body the Select Committee on Science and Technology. When it recognised the possibility that new diseases could arise from mixing human and animal material and recommended cytoplasmic hybrid embryos, it said:
“In the event that research using cytoplasmic hybrid embryos is authorised, we urge the Government to ensure that appropriate risk management procedures are established and implemented”.
The Government responded:
“The Government agrees with the Committee that researchers will have to apply appropriate risk management procedures for research that involves the mixing of human and animal materials. We will keep the current procedures under review.”
What we are looking for in this probing amendment is recognition from the Government that they have considered all possible safety concerns and whether the Environmental Protection Act 1990 is the appropriate vehicle for addressing them.
The Science and Technology Committee received submissions from the Scottish Council on Human Bioethics, which told us that by undertaking such work, scientists risk creating new diseases and that it is
“well known that many animals may harbour in their organs, cells and genome, microbiological and other entities which may cross the species barrier and develop in the host”.
Given their concerns and those expressed by the Select Committee, the amendment is a probing one designed to find out whether the Government have taken those concerns on board, particularly as we all recognise, having read the legislation, that human admixed embryos is a fairly wide category.