Reproduction bill 'better than nothing' after eight-year wait

Labour MP Dianne Yates would like tighter controls on aspects of fertility treatments and the creation of designer babies, but is pleased there are now guidelines in place.

"It's taken eight years to get the bill through and I'm really pleased that we do have a legislative framework in place," Ms Yates said yesterday.

Her Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill was strongly supported 102-18 in a third-reading conscience vote on Wednesday night.

Ms Yates drafted the bill in 1996 and it was amended many times by a select committee which was often overtaken by technological advances.

The bill passes most of the responsibility for fertility treatments to an ethics committee under guidelines in the legislation. No new treatments will be practised unless they are covered by the guidelines.

The bill bans some procedures, including cloning embryos, genetic modification and the use of cells from foetuses for reproductive purposes.

Ms Yates said her main aim was to ban cloning humans, and other issues were included as the bill progressed.

Amendments had been influenced by British, Canadian and Australian laws, international biotechnological conferences and public submissions.

"Even so, this bill poses as many problems as it answers and I believe the revised bill still leaves some highly controversial technologies to decisions made by an advisory committee which will formulate mere guidelines and not regulations," she said.

"There are parts of the bill, for instance taking a sperm or gametes from dead people, PGD (pre-implantation genetic diagnosis), some issues that are left to guidelines - even the consent process - I would much rather have it as a regulation with penalties involved, but the House didn't agree," she said. "But I think that guidelines are better than nothing."

When Ms Yates introduced the bill, it proposed a licensing authority and licensing regime for assisted human reproduction services, storage of gametes (eggs or sperm) and embryos, and research. However, as time went by, changes were made to remove the licensing provisions and instead allow for a ministerial advisory committee to provide advice on technology and research, develop guidelines for permitted activities and monitor established procedures. An ethics committee will review all applications for assisted human reproduction that are not established procedures.

Ms Yates encouraged the public to have its say when these issues arose.

Most MPs who spoke during the third reading debate supported the legislation and acknowledged that it dealt with a very difficult area. Of those who opposed the bill, some thought it did not go far enough, while others considered it too loose in its controls.

Some parties cast split votes on the third reading. All Labour's MPs supported it, as did all the Greens and all the New Zealand First MPs. National had 22 in favour and five against, Act two in favour and six against and United Future two in favour and six against.

- NZPA