Stem cell debate: now IVF is under threat

The Federal House of Representatives agreed in principle on Monday night to pass the Research Involving Embryos Bill, voting 103 in favour to 36 against. But debate continued on the controversial Bill as the first of a series of amendments was proposed.

Liberal backbencher Alan Cadman introduced his proposed amendment to the Bill, aimed at further tightening research restrictions. His changes would confine use of excess IVF embryos to the extraction of embryonic stem cells, and prohibit use that would cause damage or destruction of the embryo.

"I do not think it is unnecessarily restrictive of the processes of research which this legislation seeks to cover," he told Parliament.

But Attorney-General Daryl Williams disagreed with Cadman and said that he had been advised that the amendments would stop existing IVF processes.

"This would effectively result in a ban on research into ART technology, on the training of ART technicians and on research into embryology where the use damages or destroys the embryo," Williams said.

Labor health spokesman Stephen Smith also spoke out against the amendments, saying it would have adverse implications for current IVF procedures.

Cadman's amendments were supported by other vocal opponents of the stem cell Bill, including Deputy Prime Minister John Anderson and Tony Abbott.

"How can we be sure, without this amendment, that corporations and scientists will not use human material -- will not use embryos -- for the kind of experimentation which has traditionally been reserved for animals?" Abbott said.

"As much as I trust the scientists of this country, I do not believe that we should give them that opportunity; I don't believe that we should allow them to be tempted in this way, and that is precisely what will happen if this amendment is not passed."

Anderson questioned the role of pharmaceutical companies in use of embryonic stem cells.

John Murphy, a Labor backbencher opposed to the Bill, also queried the speed at which the Bill was being pushed through Parliament, and claimed that it was being driven by economic imperatives and scientific greed.

"The want the legislation to go through the Parliament so that they can continue to do what they have been doing for many years: creating surplus embryos in the name of medical science so that they can make a lot of money," he said.

"That is the true agenda of the scientists promoting this. The secondary consideration is that they might find some cures."

Dr Chris Juttner, medical director for Australian stem cell research company BresaGen, was due to appearing before the Senate Committee this afternoon to discuss the Bill.

"This [general support] is what we expected from the House [of Representatives]," Juttner said. "Our view is that it will be closer in the Senate."

Juttner said that of the various amendments to the Bill under debate, a proposed amendment by Queensland Liberal MP Teresa Gambaro, which proposes removing references to IVF from the Bill and allowing current practice to continue unchanged, seemed reasonable to the company.