|
representatives vote 2021-12-01#3
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2022-02-24 10:11:46
|
Title
Bills — Mitochondrial Donation Law Reform (Maeve's Law) Bill 2021; Consideration in Detail- Mitochondrial Donation Law Reform (Maeve's Law) Bill 2021 - Consideration in Detail - No destruction of zygote or embryo
Description
<p class="speaker">Greg Hunt</p><p>I present a supplementary explanatory memorandum. I seek leave to move government amendments (1) to (16) on sheet QJ138 and government amendment (17) on sheet QJ149 as circulated together.</p>-
- The majority voted in favour of *disagreeing* with [amendments](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2021-12-01.136.1) introduced by Menzies MP [Kevin Andrews](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/menzies/kevin_andrews) (Liberal), which means they failed
- This was a [free vote](https://peo.gov.au/understand-our-parliament/how-parliament-works/parliament-at-work/crossing-the-floor/) (also known as a conscience vote), which means our MPs voted according to their own beliefs rather than strictly along party lines.
- ### What would this amendment do?
- MP Andrews [explained that](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2021-12-01.136.1):
- > *These amendments go to what I believe is a fundamental area of difference in terms of the ethical consideration of this matter, and I'll put it in this context: there are essentially five techniques which are provided for in this bill, but they can be split into two categories. There's a category of mitochondrial techniques which involve the transfer of material between eggs—namely, the maternal spindle transfer and the geminal vesicle transfer. They don't involve any destruction of an embryo in order to undertake those techniques. There are three other techniques that involve transfer of material between zygotes or embryos—namely, pronuclear transfer, first polar body transfer and second polar body transfer. These three techniques involve, necessarily as part of the undertaking of the procedure, the destruction of a zygote or an embryo.*
- >
- > *I note in passing that under the bill only two techniques—namely, maternal spindle transfer and pronuclear transfer—are permitted for the clinical trial licence phase. But one of these techniques—namely, pronuclear transfer—involves the destruction of the zygote or the embryo. Accordingly, these amendments, when taken together, would remove from the bill those techniques or procedures which result in the destruction of the embryo. It would allow mitochondrial research to be undertaken involving the gametes, the egg and the sperm, but it wouldn't involve the destruction of an embryo. For me, that is a line at the end of the day consistent with the view that I took almost 20 years ago when we were discussing stem cell research and cell therapy at that time—that there is a line between techniques which do not involve the destruction of an embryo and the techniques which do involve the destruction of the embryo.*
- ### Amendment text
- > *(7) Schedule 1, item 19, page 34 (line 4), omit the definition of pronuclear transfer.*
- >
- > *(8) Schedule 1, item 19, page 34 (line 5), omit the definition of second polar body transfer.*
- >
- > *(9) Schedule 1, item 20, page 34 (line 15), omit paragraph 7A(b).*
- >
- > *(10) Schedule 1, item 20, page 34 (line 17), omit "transfer;", substitute "transfer.".*
- >
- > *(11) Schedule 1, item 20, page 34 (line 18), omit paragraph 7A(e).*
- >
- > *(12) Schedule 1, item 20, page 35 (cell at table item 1, column headed "the permitted techniques are …", paragraph (b)), omit the paragraph.*
- >
- > *(13) Schedule 1, item 20, page 35 (cell at table item 1, column headed "the permitted techniques are …", paragraph (e)), omit the paragraph.*
- >
- > *(14) Schedule 1, item 20, page 35 (cell at table item 2, column headed "the permitted techniques are …" ), omit the cell, substitute:*
- >
- >> *maternal spindle transfer*
- >
- > *(15) Schedule 1, item 20, page 35 (line 14) to page 36 (line 4), omit section 7D.*
- >
- > *(16) Schedule 1, item 20, page 36 (line 29) to page 37 (line 8), omit section 7G.*
- ### What does this bill do?
- According to the [bills digest](https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd2021a/21bd065):
- > *Mitochondrial disease is a group of conditions that can cause serious health issues and, in severe cases, can cause death in childhood. There is no known cure for mitochondrial disease.*
- >
- > *Mitochondrial donation is an assisted reproductive technology (ART) that can assist women to avoid passing mitochondrial DNA disease to their biological child. This technology is not a cure for mitochondrial disease but is rather a way to prevent children from inheriting mitochondria that can cause mitochondrial disease.*
- >
- > *Under the current legislative framework, mitochondrial donation is illegal under the Prohibition of Human Cloning for Reproduction Act 2002 (Cth) and the Research Involving Human Embryos Act 2002 (Cth). The Mitochondrial Donation Law Reform (Maeve’s Law) Bill 2021 (the Bill) amends relevant Acts and associated Regulations to make mitochondrial donation legal for research, training and human reproductive purposes. The overall aim is for women at risk of passing on mitochondrial disease to have reproductive options for biological children without the increased risk of their child having mitochondrial disease.*
- >
- > *Primarily the Bill makes changes to ensure that it is no longer an offence to create, for the purposes of reproduction, and under the relevant mitochondrial donation licences, a human embryo that:*
- >
- > * *contains the genetic material of more than two people and*
- > * *contains heritable changes to the genome.*
- Read more in the [bills digest](https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/bd/bd2021a/21bd065).
<p>Leave granted.</p><p>I move:</p><p class="italic">(1) Schedule 1, item 10, page 6 (line 4), after "from", insert "a human egg of".</p><p class="italic">(2) Schedule 1, item 17, page 18 (lines 14 to 19), omit paragraph 28J(2)(a), substitute:</p><p class="italic">(a) that appropriate protocols are in place to enable proper consent to be obtained before any of the following activities are carried out under the licence (see paragraph 28N(1A)(a)):</p><p class="italic">(i) an excess ART embryo, a human egg or a human sperm is used;</p><p class="italic">(ii) a human zygote or a human embryo (other than an excess ART embryo) is created or used;</p><p class="italic">(iii) any material not covered by subparagraph (i) or (ii) of this paragraph is created, developed, produced or used;</p><p class="italic">(aa) that appropriate protocols are in place to enable compliance with any restrictions on such consent;</p><p class="italic">(3) Schedule 1, item 17, page 21 (lines 22 to 29), omit subsection 28N(1), substitute:</p><p class="italic">(1) A mitochondrial donation licence is subject to the condition that the requirements of subsection (1A) are met before any of the following activities are carried out as authorised by the licence:</p><p class="italic">(a) an excess ART embryo, a human egg or a human sperm is used;</p><p class="italic">(b) a zygote or a human embryo (other than an excess ART embryo) is created or used;</p><p class="italic">(c) any material not covered by paragraph (a) or (b) of this subsection is created, developed, produced or used.</p><p class="italic">(1A) The requirements are as follows:</p><p class="italic">(a) each responsible person in relation to the material referred to in paragraph (1)(a), (b) or (c) must have given proper consent to the carrying out of the activity;</p><p class="italic">(b) the licence holder must have reported in writing to the NHMRC Licensing Committee that such consent has been obtained, and any restrictions to which the consent is subject.</p><p class="italic">(4) Schedule 1, item 17, page 21 (line 32), omit "(1)(b)", substitute "(1A)(b)".</p><p class="italic">(5) Schedule 1, item 17, page 22 (lines 3 to 6), omit subsection 28N(3), substitute:</p><p class="italic">(3) A mitochondrial donation licence is subject to the condition that the carrying out of an activity referred to in paragraph (1)(a), (b) or (c) must be in accordance with any restrictions to which the proper consent under paragraph (1A)(a) is subject.</p><p class="italic">(6) Schedule 1, item 17, page 23 (lines 7 and 8), omit "the use of a human egg or a human sperm", substitute "the carrying out of an activity referred to in paragraph (1)(a), (b) or (c)".</p><p class="italic">(7) Schedule 1, item 17, page 23 (lines 16 to 18), omit the definition of <i>responsible person</i> in subsection 28N(8), substitute:</p><p class="italic"><i>responsible person</i>, in relation to material mentioned in an item of the following table, means a person mentioned in column 2 of the item.</p><p class="italic">(8) Schedule 1, item 17, page 25 (after line 6), after subclause 28P(5), insert:</p><p class="italic">(5A) Without limiting section 15, the NHMRC Licensing Committee may also request, and have regard to, advice from any person having appropriate expertise.</p><p class="italic">(9) Schedule 1, item 17, page 26 (line 33), omit "28N(1)(a)", substitute "28N(1A)(a)".</p><p class="italic">(10) Schedule 1, item 17, page 27 (line 11), after "from", insert "a human egg of".</p><p class="italic">(11) Schedule 1, item 17, page 28 (after line 13), after subclause 28R(6), insert:</p><p class="italic">(6A) A person who is or was the holder of a clinical trial licence or a clinical practice licence must take reasonable steps to ensure that information the person collects as required by subsection (1) or (3) is not disclosed to another person except for the purpose of complying with this Act.</p><p class="italic">(6B) A person who is or was any of the following must not disclose information collected as required by subsection (1) or (3) to another person except for the purpose of complying with this Act:</p><p class="italic">(a) the holder of a clinical trial licence or a clinical practice licence;</p><p class="italic">(b) an embryologist specified in such a licence;</p><p class="italic">(c) a person authorised by such a licence to carry out an activity authorised by the licence.</p><p class="italic">(6C) Subsections (6A) and (6B) apply despite a law of a State. However, those subsections do not prevent a person from disclosing information to a Registrar of births, deaths and marriages (however described) of a State in accordance with a law of that State relating to the notification or registration of births.</p><p class="italic">Note: A defendant bears an evidential burden in relation to the matter in this subsection (see subsection 13.3(3) of the <i>Criminal Code</i>).</p><p class="italic">(12) Schedule 1, item 17, page 28 (line 14), omit "and (6)", substitute ", (6), (6A) and (6B)".</p><p class="italic">(13) Schedule 1, item 17, page 28 (line 16), omit "the person", substitute "the person who is or was the holder of the licence".</p><p class="italic">(14) Schedule 1, item 17, page 28 (line 20), omit "or (6)", substitute ", (6), (6A) or (6B)".</p><p class="italic">(15) Schedule 1, page 45 (after line 9), after item 55, insert:</p><p class="italic">55A At the end of section 19</p><p class="italic">Add:</p><p class="italic">(4) A report under this section must not include information about any of the following matters unless the NHMRC Licensing Committee considers that the information does not identify, and is not reasonably capable of being used to identify, any person:</p><p class="italic">(a) approvals under subsection 28P(3) (including applications for such approvals and the outcomes of those applications);</p><p class="italic">(b) births of children as a result of pregnancies achieved using a mitochondrial donation technique under a clinical trial licence or a clinical practice licence;</p><p class="italic">(c) adverse events notified to the NHMRC Licensing Committee under paragraph 28S(3)(a).</p><p class="italic">(16) Schedule 1, item 103, page 55 (table item 2, column headed "Protected persons"), after "28J(4)", insert "or 28P(5A)".</p><p class="italic">(17) Schedule 1, item 17, page 26 (lines 11 to 17), omit paragraph 28Q(1)(d), substitute:</p><p class="italic">(d) that a human embryo created for a woman using the technique is not selected for implantation in that woman on the basis of the sex of the embryo.</p><p>The proposed government amendments will (1) clarify that donated mitochondria must be sourced from human eggs; (2) expand and clarify the circumstances for proper consent before mitochondrial donation treatment; (3) clarify the circumstances in which the Embryo Research Licensing Committee of the NHMRC is able to seek expert advice when performing its statutory functions; (4) enhance mitochondrial donor privacy by clarifying the operation of provisions that deal with the mitochondrial donation donor register; (5) further enhance privacy by ensuring that the Embryo Research Licensing Committee's statutory report to parliament cannot disclose identifiable personal information; and (6) address an issue raised by the recent review of the bill by the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee that relates to sex selection of embryos by providing that embryos created using mitochondrial donation techniques cannot be selected for implantation on the basis of their sex.</p><p>I thank all members of the House from the government, the opposition and the crossbench, those opposed to the bill and those supportive of the bill. I believe we have been able to strike an agreement on these measures which I understand are not controversial. I particularly thank the member for Menzies for his support and the member for Hindmarsh, the member for McMahon and the member for Mayo for their support. These clarify the bill and, I believe, address the concerns of those who may not ultimately vote for it, but I hope these amendments will find the support of all members of the House.</p> <p class="speaker">Ged Kearney</p><p>I rise to speak to these amendments to the Mitochondrial Donation Law Reform (Maeve's Law) Bill 2021, or, as we now know it, Maeve's law. As this is a conscience vote, I rise to speak not as a shadow assistant minister but as an individual MP. Before I go to the amendments, I would like to acknowledge every member of the House who has expressed their views in this chamber with respect and passion. It has been an honour to bear witness to this considered debate on an issue that raises age-old tensions between the advancements of technology and deeply seated faith based beliefs. I thank the community members, faith leaders, researchers and, of course, the mito community and the Mito Foundation in particular for all their hard work and consultation. And, of course, we acknowledge and thank Maeve's family.</p><p>To all the members of the commissions and parliamentary inquiries, I say thank you, especially to the member for Macarthur for taking the time to sit with me and go over this with long explanations and discussions. I pay tribute to the hard work of the minister in bringing this important bill to this House and the enormous amount of work that he has done. I pay tribute to past shadow health ministers, especially the member for McMahon, who has worked on this bill over the years. But in particular I would like to acknowledge the member for Hindmarsh, the shadow minister for health, who has shown great sensitivity and stewardship of this bill through our own party processes in this last leg of the bill's evolution. On speaking to these amendments, he has offered me very wise counsel, and I am pleased to say that we are absolutely on the same page in supporting these amendments. I thank him for his patience and clarity in explaining them not only to me but to all of the Labor MPs who sought his advice.</p><p>The amendments will do a number of important things. They will clarify that donated mitochondria must be sourced from human eggs. This was already a feature of the bill but, due to its importance, the amendments put it beyond doubt. They expand and clarify the circumstances in which proper consent is needed before mitochondrial donation techniques are used. They clarify the circumstances in which the Embryo Research Licensing Committee of the NHMRC is able to seek expert advice when performing its statutory functions. They enhance mitochondrial donor privacy by clarifying the operation of provisions that deal with the mitochondrial donation donor registry. They further enhance privacy by ensuring that the Embryo Research Licensing Committee statutory report to parliament can't disclose identifiable personal information. Finally, they address an issue raised by the recent review of the bill by the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee that relates to sex selection of embryos by providing that embryos created using the mitochondrial donation techniques cannot be selected for implantation on the basis of their sex.</p><p>This last point is a late addition to the amendments that is worthy of a little more explanation. The review of the bill by the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Committee, which delivered its report in August 2021, recommended that additional clarification or an amendment may be appropriate in relation to embryo sex selection. In particular, the committee questioned whether the provision of the bill that would enable a woman the option of selecting the sex of embryos is necessary and appropriate. This is especially the case as the inclusion of sex selection requires additional manipulation of embryos and can create additional risk to their viability. The government amendments omit this sex selection condition and insert a new licence condition in its place, meaning the selection of an embryo cannot be on the basis of sex.</p><p>On the basis of in-depth discussion with the member for Hindmarsh and other stakeholders in the mito community, it is clear that these amendments do not impinge on the purpose and promise of this bill. Therefore, I will be supporting them.</p><p>In conclusion, both the member for Hindmarsh and I support these amendments and this bill because, as the member for Hindmarsh said in his speech on the second reading:</p><p class="italic">… for all of the technical and ethical issues that this bill raises for members, ultimately these pieces of legislation are about people. They're about patients. In this case, they're about very young children and their parents, grandparents and wider families.</p><p>I support these amendments.</p> <p class="speaker">Bob Katter</p><p>I don't think there's anyone here who has looked seriously at the Mitochondrial Donation Law Reform (Maeve's Law) Bill 2021 who hasn't spent a lot of time agonising over it. For some 76 years, every single educational institution in Australia has put Aldous Huxley's <i>Brave </i><i>New World</i> on the reading list. <i>Brave New World</i> is about cloning and selling cells. When we had the cell debate here previously, the late Peter Andren—a person respected, I think, by every person in this House for his integrity and his intelligence, who was a very strong atheist or agnostic—and Tony Windsor voted 23 times against cell research. I was surprised because both of them were very antireligion, and it was looked at as sort of a religious issue. I quote Peter Andren. He said, 'I just cannot look forward to a society in which human beings are bought and sold on the shelves of Woolworths and Coles.'</p><p>I think, at the end of the day, that's a pretty good call. Educators in this country have left that book on the reading list, and have been determined that that book is on the reading list, for over 75 years. A lot of scientists, with all due respect to them, get carried away and start playing God, and this really is in that sort of pavilion. So I will be opposing the bill. The late and great Peter Andren, I think, gave a great example.</p> <p class='motion-notice motion-notice-truncated'>Long debate text truncated.</p>-
-
|