To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by Lord Darzi of Denham on 1 June (HL 3769), whether all aspects of the clinical and research roles are separated so that neither the person responsible for a research licence granted by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority nor the nominal licensee would be permitted to give medication or collect eggs from patients undergoing fertility treatment at the same centre. [HL3967]

To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by Lord Darzi of Denham on 1 June (HL 3769), whether inspectors employed by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority check patient case-notes or the patient administration system records at a licensed centre to confirm that the clinician seen on each attendance is not directly engaged in separately licensed research at the same centre with the patient's gametes or embryos. [HL3968]

To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by Lord Darzi of Denham on 1 June (HL 3769), how the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority ensures that personnel responsible for laboratory services as part of a patient's fertility treatment are not also directly engaged in research with the same patient's gametes or embryos, in so far as that does not constitute routine clinical tests. [HL3969]

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has advised that where donated gametes are used for the purpose of research, the authority's code of practice requires the treatment centre to ensure that aspects of the clinical and research roles are separated. When eggs are being donated to research through an egg-sharing agreement, the centre must ensure that the eggs are divided between the egg donor and the recipient, in this case the research project, by someone not directly involved in that project.

The HFEA also advises that it is up to individual centres to decide exactly how they meet these requirements and to ensure that personnel giving medication and carrying out egg collection are qualified and competent to perform such tasks. When centres licensed to carry out research and treatment are inspected, patient records are reviewed to ensure compliance with the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990, licence conditions and the guidance in the HFEA’s code of practice.

To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answers by Lord Darzi of Denham on 23 March (WA 92) and by Lord Drayson on 19 May (WA 290), what is their assessment of the comments attributed to Professor Sir Ian Wilmut regarding the relative merits of induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells compared to attempts at getting human embryonic stem cells by cloning, as described in an interview by the French website Gènéthique on 18 May; and which non-reproductive applications would benefit from nuclear transfer that could not be addressed by the use of iPS cells. [HL3970]

The Government believe that it would be premature to conclude that the advent of induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells has superseded the need for research into deriving embryonic stem cells via cell nuclear replacement.

Whilst iPS cells undoubtedly represent an exciting scientific advance, there are still numerous technical issues around both the derivation and biological properties of iPS cells that must be resolved before proceeding to clinical application. Therefore, it is impossible to predict what the relative contributions of nuclear transfer and iPS cell technology might be to medical need, and so, the Government continue to support all forms of stem cell research.

To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by Lord Triesman on 29 October 2007 (WA 144) regarding Medical Research Council expenditure, what assessment they have made of comments attributed to Dr Miodrag Stojkovic regarding cheaper treatment for patients who give eggs or embryos to researchers in Newcastle (as reported by the Guardian on 29 October 2004); and what assessment they have made of the subsequent experiences of fertility patients. [HL3971]

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) advises that it has not assessed the comments attributed to Dr Miodrag Stojkovic as reported in the Guardian on 29 October 2004.

Following a public consultation in 2006, the HFEA decided that egg donation, either as non-patient donation or through egg-sharing arrangements, to HFEA-licensed research should be permitted, if considered to be appropriate by a licence committee. Where it is possible to donate through egg-sharing arrangements to either research or treatment, there should be parity in the benefit-in-kind offered so that it is not advantageous to donate to either one or the other.