Dr Evan Harris MP

Working hard for Oxford West and Abingdon since 1997

Dr Evan Harris MP

Government Response on Human-Animal Hybrid Embryos: A Triumph for Rational Policy-Making

2.40.00pm BST (GMT +0100) Mon 8th Oct 2007

Commenting on the Government's response today to the report of the Joint Committee on the Human Tissue and Embryos (Draft) Bill, Liberal Democrat Science Spokesman Dr Evan Harris, who co-ordinated the campaign to have a permissive approach to human-animal hybrid embryos, said:

"The Government has finally agreed - following three select committee reports - that all forms of human-animal hybrid embryos should be permitted to be created for research subject to HFEA approval. This is a just reward for the campaigning of scientists to prevent a perceived 'yuk' factor from closing down potential research avenues and a triumph for rational policy-making. The Government's response is not enthusiastic but I am sure that Parliament will support this approach on a free vote.

"The Government was right to reject the Joint Committee's rather bizarre recommendation to stamp the words 'donor conceived' on the birth certificates of such children.

"The requirement of the 1990 Act for clinics to have regard for the potential child's 'need for a father' was never supported by evidence of merit, and was always discriminatory. The Government were right to repeal it in the draft Bill and are right to reject the Committee's equally discriminatory and non-evidence-based proposal relating to 'the need for two parents'.

"In abandoning their plans to merge the HTA with the HFEA to create RATE, the Government has bowed to the inevitable.

"The Government were also correct to reject the Joint committee's proposed changes to the regulatory framework whereby the HFEA would have the power to prevent or permit Parliament from legislating."

Related Links:

Printed and hosted by Prater Raines Ltd, 82b Sandgate High Street, Folkestone CT20 3BX.
Published and promoted by Dr Evan Harris MP, 27 Park End Street, Oxford OX1 1HU.
The views expressed are those of the party, not of the service provider.