 House of Commons |
Session 2007 - 08 Publications on the internet General Committee Debates Human Fertilisation and Embryology |
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [Lords] |
The Committee consisted of the following Members:Hannah Weston, Celia
Blacklock, Committee Clerks †
attended the Committee Public Bill CommitteeTuesday 3 June 2008(Morning)[Mr. Roger Gale in the Chair]Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [Lords](Except clauses 4, 11, 14 and 23, schedule 2, and any new clauses or new schedules relating to the termination of pregnancy by registered medical practitioners)10.30
am
The
Chairman: I have a few announcements to make. Hon. Members
may wish to remove their jackets. As long as I am in the Chair, that
will be in order, but I cannot speak for my co-Chairman, who will be
joining you next week. Will members of the Committee and others in the
room please ensure that their mobile phones, pagers and other
electronic devices are switched off during our proceedings—by
“off”, I mean off? The Committee may wish to be reminded
of the money resolution in connection with the Bill, copies of which
are available in the
room. I
remind members of the Committee that adequate notice must be given of
amendments. As a general rule, Mr. Hood and I will not be
calling starred amendments; neither do we intend to call amendments
that are not signed by members of the Committee, because we would
presume that they would not be moved. I mention that now because a
number of amendments have already been tabled by hon. Members who are
not members of the Committee. If members of the Committee wish to pick
them up, they will need to add their names to them so that they can
appear on the amendment paper for the next
sitting. I also remind
hon. Members about the procedure at the start of today’s
sitting. The Committee will first be asked to consider the programme
motion, on which debate is limited to half an hour. We will then
proceed to a motion to report written evidence before starting the
clause-by-clause scrutiny of the Bill. I hope that everything is
clear.
That— (1)
the Committee shall (in addition to its first meeting at 10.30 a.m. on
Tuesday 3rd June) meet—
(a) at 4.00 p.m. on Tuesday 3rd
June; (b) at 9.00 a.m.
and 1.00 p.m. on Thursday 5th
June; (c) at 10.30 a.m.
and 4.00 p.m. on Tuesday 10th
June; (d) at 9.00 a.m.
and 1.00 p.m. on Thursday 12th
June; (e) at 10.30 a.m.
and 4.00 p.m. on Tuesday 17th June;
(2) the proceedings shall be
taken in the following order: Clauses 1 to 3; Clause 5; Schedule 1;
Clauses 6 to 10; Clauses 12 and 13; Schedules 3 and 4; Clauses 15 to
22; Clauses 24 to 28; Schedule 5; Clauses 29 to 56; Schedule 6; Clauses
57 to 65;
Schedule 7; Clause 66; Schedule 8; Clauses 67 to 69; new Clauses (not
relating to the termination of pregnancy by registered medical
practitioners); new Schedules (not relating to the termination of
pregnancy by registered medical practitioners); remaining proceedings
on the Bill. (3) the
proceedings shall (so far as not previously concluded) be brought to a
conclusion at 7.00 p.m. on Tuesday 17th
June. I
welcome you to the Chair, Mr. Gale, as I will welcome
Mr. Hood when he joins us for this important Committee. The
Bill has received its Second Reading and certain clauses have been
debated on the Floor of the House. It has been subjected to
consultation and pre-legislative scrutiny, and it has attracted great
attention from the Science and Technology Committee. We are fortunate
that members of the Committee have extensive knowledge and expertise in
respect of the Bill. I welcome, in particular, the presence of the hon.
Members for Salisbury and for Oxford, West and Abingdon, and my hon.
Friends the Members for Bolton, South-East, for Brighton, Kemptown and
for Norwich, North, who served on the Science and Technology Committee.
Indeed, the hon. Member for Salisbury and my hon. Friend the Member for
Norwich, North also served on the pre-legislative scrutiny Committee.
Their wisdom and expertise will benefit our consideration of the
Bill. I
am also joined by my hon. Friends the Members for Warrington, North,
for Calder Valley, for Crawley, for Cardiff, North and my right hon.
Friend the Member for Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill. They are all
experienced parliamentarians with a great interest in such matters and
various views on the subjects that we shall be discussing. I welcome
the hon. Member for Boston and Skegness, who has so far led his team in
adopting a considered, thoughtful and diligent approach to this
important Bill. I am grateful for the way in which he and his
colleagues will bring great expertise to our proceedings and will
continue to debate matters that we know are of
importance. I
hope that the Lord Commissioner of Her Majesty’s Treasury, my
hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Hall Green, and the hon. Member
for Rugby and Kenilworth will not have much work to do and that we
shall proceed in an orderly, timely fashion. I am sure that you intend
to make sure that we do so, Mr.
Gale. When my hon.
Friend the Member for Norwich, North was referring to his considerable
knowledge of science during the debates on the Floor of the House, he
said that he knew “science backwards”. That caused
considerable discussion among journalists who asked whether there was
any other way to consider science. The Bill regulates important areas
of research science that are of crucial importance to our
communities. I assure
the Committee that we do not intend to start at the back and work
forward. We shall start at clause 1 and work logically through the
Bill. Our proceedings will be challenging and I am confident that the
excellent debates that took place on the Floor of House will continue
in Committee and that, at the end of our deliberations, we will have a
Bill that is worthy of the House. I commend the motion to the
Committee. Mark
Simmonds (Boston and Skegness) (Con): I join the Minister
in saying how pleased I am to see you in the Chair, Mr.
Gale. I look forward to working under your guidance and that of Mr Hood
during the passage of this Bill. You will be aware of the view of the
Opposition that this Bill deserves completely free votes, and therefore
there will be free votes for Conservative Members in all Divisions in
Committee. It is a shame that the Government do not have the same
policy. I acknowledge
the points that the Minister made about the very thorough and detailed
pre-legislative scrutiny that took place prior to the introduction of
this Bill. There was full debate and discussion, and many hon. Members
who took part in that scrutiny are members of the Public Bill
Committee, which is to be welcomed. We all look forward to benefiting
from their expertise and experience in this area.
May I thank the Minister for her
kind remarks? I have been impressed by her detailed knowledge and
understanding of these very complex issues, both ethically and
scientifically. I hope that we can continue the constructive dialogue
that we have had so far to ensure that the Bill is as good as it can
be. When it passes into law, I hope that it will have as good a
reputation as the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 and that
it lasts as long as that Act, if not longer, despite many fast-moving
scientific discoveries and
advances. I
welcome to the Committee my hon. Friends the Members for Rugby and
Kenilworth, for Hemel Hempstead, for Salisbury, and for South-West
Devon, who will make their own points in their individual ways. Of
course, we have a very wide range of opinions on this side of the
Committee, which will become evident as the Bill progresses. I would
finally like to say that there are a large number of issues in the Bill
that were not debated on the Floor if the House and I hope we will
discuss them in Committee. I have no problem with the programme
motion.
Dr.
Evan Harris (Oxford, West and Abingdon) (LD): I join those
who have already spoken in welcoming you to the Chair, Mr.
Gale. It has been about 18 months since I last served on a Public Bill
Committee, but that was under your chairmanship and I, at least, had a
good time, even if I cannot speak for
you. I echo the
comments that have been made about the scrutiny that has been
undertaken. The Government must be commended for issuing a consultation
paper, a White Paper and a draft Bill. Throughout that process they
made a number of changes, following the scrutiny by the Science and
Technology Committee, which was initiated under the chairmanship of the
hon. Member for Norwich, North, who chaired the big inquiry of 2005. I
pay tribute to his work and that of the hon. Members for Bolton,
South-East, for Salisbury and for Brighton, Kemptown, who are all
veterans of that Committee and subsequent inquiries. While there was
not always unanimity on that Committee, it is the case that in the
first inquiry, all of us present who served on that Committee took a
common view and we have lasted the course by seeing it through to this
stage. As the hon.
Member for Boston and Skegness said, there will be free votes on this
side of the Committee. Although the Liberal Democrats generally have
policies in support of scientific progress in this area, there are
different views from mine, as is exemplified by my hon. Friend the
Member for Southport, who will seek to catch your eye, Mr.
Gale, or kick me when he disagrees with
anything.
Mr.
Tom Clarke (Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill) (Lab): In
view of what both Opposition spokesmen have said, I would like to make
it clear that when I accepted the invitation of the Government Whips to
serve on the Committee, they had the full knowledge that I did not
support the Bill on Second Reading. They know that I intend to vote in
accordance with the merits of the arguments as I see
them.
Dr.
Harris: I welcome that, and I think it is good that at
least one person on the Government side of the Committee has different
views from the Government line. I hope that we will not be dividing in
Committee, but that we have the opportunity for Divisions on Report.
Having Divisions in Committee, with just a few of us here, would not
give scope for the free votes that we would want to have.
My hon.
Friend the Member for Southport and the hon. Members for Boston and
Skegness and for Hemel Hempstead made excellent speeches during earlier
stages of the Bill’s passage. I pay tribute to them and hope
that all members of the Committee, including those who do not speak
from the Front Bench, will play as full a part as I expect that they
will. I hope we will be able to make good progress, because it would be
a tragedy if we had to rush any new clauses and amendments towards the
end of our
proceedings. Question
put and agreed
to.
The
Chairman: Before we proceed, may I indicate that when the
Programming Sub-Committee met last night, we discussed the possibility
of needing more time. I think that hon. Members on both sides of the
Committee have broadly agreed that that is unlikely to be necessary,
but I have indicated that, as far as the Chair is concerned, I would be
willing to sit on a Tuesday evening, in addition to Tuesday morning and
afternoon, should that become necessary. If that were to happen, I
would expect negotiation through the usual channels to ensure that both
members of the Committee and, more significantly, the staff of the
House, have adequate notice so that they can adjust their
diaries.
Ordered, That,
subject to the discretion of the Chairman, any written evidence
received by the Committee shall be reported to the House for
publication.—[Dawn
Primarolo.]
The
Chairman: Copies of the memoranda that the Committee
receives will be made available in the room. I know that one has been
received already, and if we receive any more, they will be placed on
the
table.
Clause 1Meaning
of “embryo” and
“gamete”
Mark
Simmonds: I beg to move amendment No. 16, in
clause 1, page 1, line 10, after
second ‘embryo’, insert ‘where fertilisation is
complete’.
No. 17, in
clause 1, page 1, line 14, at
end insert— ‘(c) for this
purpose fertilisation is not complete until the appearance of a two
cell
zygote.’. No.
18, in
clause 1, page 2, line 5, leave
out from second ‘eggs’ to ‘but’ in line
6.
No. 19, in
clause 1, page 2, line 10, leave
out from second ‘sperm’ to ‘and’ in line
11. No. 20, in
clause 1, page 2, line 12, leave
out ‘be read accordingly’ and insert ‘live human
gametes’.
|
| |
| ©Parliamentary copyright 2008 | Prepared 4 June 2008 |