asked Her Majesty's Government:

Further to the Written Answer by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 19 June (WA 38) regarding the draft Human Tissue and Embryos Bill, on what date the draft bill was published; on what date a public consultation was announced; and what was the closing date prior to the publication of the draft bill for written evidence, other than electronic communications, from the public. [HL4456]

As stated in the Written Answer given on 19 June, Official Report, col. WA 38, the draft Human Tissue and Embryos Bill was published on 17 May 2007. Its provisions were drawn up based on the White Paper Review of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act: Proposals for Revised Legislation (Including Establishment of the Regulatory Authority for Tissue and Embryos), published on 14 December 2006. The policy proposals in the White Paper represented the outcome of the Government's review of the law, which included a public consultation exercise that ran from 16 August to 25 November 2005. Five hundred and thirty-five responses were received, in both electronic and paper formats.

asked Her Majesty's Government:

Further to the Written Answer by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 19 June (WA 39–40), bearing in mind that the response of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists to the Department of Health's public consultation stated that the “issue of mitochondrial disease is appropriately highlighted as an example where this technology may be clinically useful”, how the classification of embryos created by nuclear transfer to avoid mitochondrial disease as “permitted” embryos to be placed in a woman would prevent a cloned embryo from being implanted when the draft Human Tissue and Embryos Bill also includes the repeal of the Human Reproductive Cloning Act 2001; and [HL4458]

Further to the Written Answer by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 19 June (WA 39-40), why they are committed to a ban on human reproductive cloning when it is unclear how exercise of the proposed regulation-making power in proposed new Section 3ZA(5) of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990, introduced by the draft Human Tissue and Embryos Bill, would necessarily preclude this; and [HL4459]

Further to the Written Answer by Lord Hunt of Kings Heath on 19 June (WA 39-40), to what extent the proposed repeal of the Human Reproductive Cloning Act 2001 is a response to the Department of Health's public consultation submitted by the Nominal Licensee for Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority research licence R0152. [HL4460]

The Government are committed to a ban on reproductive cloning and have made this position clear on a number of occasions. Nothing in the draft Human Tissue and Embryos Bill is intended to permit human reproductive cloning. Provisions in the draft Bill do, however, supersede and therefore repeal the Human Reproductive Cloning Act 2001.

Clause 16(5) introduces new Section 3ZA into the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990, and defines which eggs and embryos can be placed in a woman. Only permitted eggs and embryos, as defined in the Bill, can be placed in a woman.

New Section 3ZA(5) allows for regulations to include, in the category of permitted eggs and/or embryos, those which have had applied to them in prescribed circumstances a prescribed process designed to prevent the transmission of serious mitochondrial disease. Any such regulations would be subject to affirmative resolution in both Houses.

The draft Bill follows the Government's extensive review of the law on assisted reproduction and embryo research, which was, in part, informed by the recommendations of the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee's inquiry into human reproductive technologies and the law. The Government agreed with the Committee's recommendation that research undertaken on embryos using the cell nuclear replacement technique for the purpose of studying mitochondrial diseases should be permissible in law, and undertook further consultation on this point. The regulation-making power in proposed new Section 3ZA(5) is intended to provide a mechanism, should research lead to a safe and reliable method to prevent the avoidance of serious mitochondrial disease, for its use in assisted conception treatment, subject to the agreement of Parliament through the affirmative resolution procedure.

Source: Human Reproductive Technologies and the Law, HC 7-I, Fifth Report of Session 2004-05.