Lord Alton of Liverpool – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Lord Alton of Liverpool on 2016-02-23.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answers by Lord Prior of Brampton on 11 February (HL5909, HL5910 and HL5960) and 12 February (HL5909), what specific licence conditions have been required by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) in accordance with its Code of Practice in order to resolve any potential or perceived conflict between the demand for sufficient numbers of zygotes to perform genome editing successfully and the usual practice of transferring embryos to the uterus following assessment of their potential to develop further after at least two to three days; what reasons the person responsible provided when requesting that reference to surplus embryos should be removed from the research project title; and whether they will now place in the Library of the House copies of the patient information and consent forms submitted to the HFEA by the person responsible in order to perform genome editing in human embryos by means of CRISPR-Cas9.
Lord Prior of Brampton
The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) publishes on its website the inspection report relating to a licence renewal application and the minutes of the Licence Committee’s decision. It does not publish other information associated with a licence application.
The Licence Committee considering the application to which the noble Lord refers was satisfied that the requirements of General Directions 0008 were met, with the exception of evidence of ethics approval, which must be submitted to the HFEA before any licensed research can begin.
The HFEA has advised that licence conditions R18-R27 and T97 address any potential conflict between the use of embryos in research and the use of embryos in the provision of treatment services. The person responsible did not give a reason on the application form for requesting that reference to surplus embryos should be removed from the research project title, nor are they required to do so. The removal of ‘surplus’ from the title does not reflect a change in the way embryos will be donated to the research.
