Clause 68
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [Lords]
1:30 pm

John Pugh (Shadow Minister, Treasury; Southport, Liberal Democrat)

I have a question about new clause 7, which has been tabled, but tabled too late. I am advised that it would be appropriate to raise that issue at this stage. If I am wrong, I stand to be corrected.

I simply wanted clarification about the whole thrust of the legislation—what is banned and what is not? It is fairly clear that the Bill bans placing animal gametes in a woman, placing human admix embryos and animal embryos in a woman, placing human embryos in an animal and placing human admix embryos in an animal. However, neither the 1990 Act nor the Bill expressly ban the placing of human gametes in an animal. There may be a good reason for that—perhaps to allow the possibility of human ovarian tissue being matured or whatever—but the legislative loophole, if it is one, would also allow the potential development of a human or part-human embryo in a non-human primate, by a gamete intra-fallopian transfer. That loophole has been spotted. If it is not a loophole, I would be grateful for any clarification that the Minister can give on the issue.

Jimmy Hood (Lanark and Hamilton East, Labour)

Order. The hon. Gentleman has raised a question about a new clause that was not selected, so the Minister need not respond, unless she wishes to.

Dawn Primarolo (Minister of State (Public Health), Department of Health; Bristol South, Labour)

I shall write to the hon. Gentleman.