Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 4 Hansard (10 April) . . Page.. 931 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

I appreciate this matter being raised. I think it needs to be raised, not just in parliaments and assemblies but across the broader community, in a really respectful way. People can then seriously open their minds and listen to those who are speaking about it, according to their feelings. The thing we cannot do is allow these decisions to be left to scientists. We must have that broader community discussion.

MR SMYTH (4.07): Mr Speaker, I think we all need to take a step back and have a very serious think about this question, because of the ramifications which may come about.

For those who did not hear his interview on the ABC the other day, a Dr Abud, from the Australian Centre of Bioethics, said he had grave concerns about what had been decided, simply because embryonic stem cell technology had not been proven, and had not had any significant successes as yet. He said his great fear was that it was the back door to human cloning, and that that was the purpose of a large amount of the research.

As I, and many others in this place, have heard before, and will hear again, I think there is a more fundamental question we need to ask before we get to the actual question of whether we should use an embryo stem cell for research. The question is, where does life begin?

Mrs Cross described the embryo as a six-day-old cluster of cells in a petri dish. If that six-day-old cluster is inserted into the woman-impregnated into the wall of the womb-it becomes a human being. That is why that six-day-old collection of cells was created. It was created for the purpose of the creation of a life. And yet we then say that because it is now surplus to our needs, we can destroy it, or use it for research. I think we have to look at the whole question of whether or not the end justifies the means.

No-one would doubt the need to find cures for all of the diseases, afflictions and conditions that affect us as human beings, but we have to ask questions as to how we get there, and what happens to us in the process.

I, too, take exception to the statement that the church does not have a role in this. Churches do have a role, as do all of us. Political parties, individuals, communities, the scientific community and the churches all have a role. There must be very, very, solid discussion on this before we progress much further.

We are looking at whether or not we can find cures. I think the temptation to be dazzled, almost, by a holy grail is something we need to put aside at first, so we can get back to the fundamental question. I always look at the fundamental question. Ms Tucker often raises it, in the form of the precautionary principle-if we do not know, then perhaps we should not go there.

The question is, what is that six-day-old cluster of cells in the petri dish? I put to you that that six-day-old cluster is a human being. There is very little that happens further to that six-day-old cluster that will not change the outcome if it is allowed to proceed to become a birthed human being.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .