Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill

Published on Mon 12th May 2008

This week the Commons receives the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill. I worry abut the level of ignorance. Very few MPs have studied science to degree level. I am one that has, but my degree, before switching to economics, was in physical science and I have only limited understanding of modern biological sciences with which the legislation deals.

The vacuum is being filled by a mixture of emotion and self interest. The emotion comes from both sides. There is a form of emotional blackmail which says that failure to authorise further human embryo research, or hybrids, will undermine cures for neurological conditions like Alzheimers. Some highly reputable scientists doubt that the potential exists or that this line of research is necessary. But, naturally, no one wishes to jeopardise cures to terrible diseases.

From the other side there are emotional appeals to reject the research because of fear that scientists are 'playing God' and are planning to create new life forms: half man - half animal. There are also deeply held religious beliefs about the sanctity of life, even in the earliest, embryonic, stage. There is self interest too: scientists who want licences for professional advancement or firms who see profit opportunities.

I have already had many letters from constituents, most but not all from religious objectors. I welcome these expressions of opinion, from both sides.

I agonised over the last Bill, in 2000, which legalised 'therapeutic cloning' of human embryos. I voted against it after being persuaded that adult stems cells - including those in umbilical cords - are adequate for research needs. Time has somewhat vindicated that cautious approach. I am sceptical, too, about this new Bill but will listen carefully to the arguments.