APPENDIX 54
Supplementary evidence from Dr Calum MacKellar
I would really like to thank the Committee for
inviting me to give evidence on Wednesday 23 July 2004. At the
end of this meeting, it was suggested that if any further points
would like to be made by participants then they should be sent
to the committee for consideration.
In this respect, I would like to share with
you a matter arising from my experience within the Bioethics Division
of the Council of Europe. Indeed, while working in Strasbourg
for a number of years, I was surprised to note how many other
European countries were closely monitoring legislative developments
in the UK. This was because:
— The UK is relatively in advance in
the field of embryological research.
— In comparison to other countries,
the UK is able to draft comprehensive legislation relatively quickly.
— UK legislation is in English.
I also noticed that a large majority of European
countries were reacting with a lot of alarm and concern with respect
to some of the procedures currently being permitted in the UK,
namely (1) the possibility of creating human embryos for research,
(2) therapeutic cloning and (3) the fertilisation of animal eggs
with human sperm. This was because many countries recognised the
very great influence of the UK in the field of reproductive technologies
and that a door was being opened in the UK to procedures which
many other states believed should remain closed.
The concern of the majority of European countries
was also reflected in that a small minority of states have copied,
word for word, UK legislative solutions. For example, once the
14-day period was enacted in the UK in which it was possible to
undertake research on human embryos, at least 12 other countries[287]
around the world drafted similar legal provisions in their own
legislation. And this also happened after the establishment of
the HFEA with other countries, such as Canada[288],
setting up "clones" of this quango.
Thus, I would like to draw the attention of
the House of Commons to the fact that it is not just considering
legislation for the UK in the field of reproductive technologies
but is indirectly drafting legislation and having a considerable
influence over a whole number of countries around the world.
July 2004
287 Belgium, Finland, Greece, Hungary, India, Israel,
Japan, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden. Back
288
Assisted Human Reproduction Agency of Canada. Back
|
