Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2008 Week 03 Hansard (Thursday, 3 April 2008) . . Page.. 995 ..
very personal decision and not one which I think we can make on an individual basis in this place. It has to happen with informed consent; there are guidelines around that. The NHMRC has to look at that, and there are safeguards in this legislation which protect that.
In relation to Mr Hargreaves’s concerns around the prohibition that there is no development of a hybrid embryo beyond 14 days, that is consistent with other prohibitions in the act. You cannot go further than 14 days. That is largely around using those for reproductive purposes, but if members look at clause 16 of the amending bill, they will see that you cannot actually get a licence to use hybrid embryos beyond the first mitotic division, which is 24 hours. I think that addresses Minister Hargreaves’s concerns.
I thank people for their contributions today. I acknowledge this issues touches at the hearts of many people for many different reasons, but I believe this is a modern, safe, regulated way forward.
MR SMYTH (Brindabella) (5:21): I seek leave to move the motion that has just been circulated in my name concerning this bill.
MR SMYTH: I move:
That the debate be adjourned and that the Minister refers the Human Cloning and Embryo Research Amendment Bill 2007 to the Commonwealth Minister for Health with the request that the scientific techniques proposed in the Bill still represent the best practice in science.
Although I have heard what the minister has said about section 30, I am not convinced that it is so. There is no real—
Ms Gallagher: You have not read it.
MR SMYTH: I have read it.
Ms Gallagher: Well, why did you make a fool of yourself?
MR SMYTH: You are making a fool of yourself by your caterwauling across the chamber.
Ms Gallagher: You never do that, Brendan!
MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Mr Gentleman): Order, Mr Smyth. Address your comments through the chair, please.
MR SMYTH: Mr Assistant Speaker, it is a simple request based on up-to-date information, which the minister refuses to acknowledge. Information from people who were involved in the Lockhart review, which has been referred to widely in this place today simply suggests that the position taken some years ago is now out of date