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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 04 Hansard (Thursday, 1 April 2004) . . Page.. 1587 ..

The advantage of embryo stem cells may already have been superseded.

Why shouldn’t we use embryonic stem cells for cures and research?

1. It is unethical.

and that is a matter for decision in this place tonight—

The process of obtaining them destroys a human embryo.

2. Embryonic stem cells can cause cancer.

Embryonic stem cells are versatile but they can also become malignant. Their potential for causing cancer is a real concern for researchers.

3. It is unnecessary.

Adult stem cells are proving to be a viable alternative.

4. The benefits of embryonic stem cells are a long way off.

Most scientists admit that the potential benefits of embryonic stem cells are still distant. However, many adult stem cell breakthroughs have already taken place.

5. The use of adult stem cells seems to overcome the problem of immune rejection, which will be a big problem with embryonic stem cells.

Our bodies quickly recognise and try to kill off foreign tissues implanted in them. By using cells from oneself, the compatibility problem is avoided.

6. Embryonic stem-cell research is not driven by hope for cure, but lust for profit.

Many of the cell lines are in the hands of private companies. The amount of vested financial interests is staggering.

What about ‘reproductive cloning’?

He goes on to say more about cloning, which we have already talked about, so I will not go into that. He continues:

Does an embryo deserve the same respect as a person?

The human embryo is a distinct, living human being

again, that is a matter for those in this place to decide—

and is entitled to the same rights as any other human being. Human life begins at conception (or fertilisation).

And he goes on. I believe that stem cells may prove to be of great value in treating certain conditions. As I have said, most of us in this place are not scientists and we must be very clear and very sure about what we are passing in the legislation tonight. I believe that Ms Tucker’s amendment will provide necessary checks and balances. The amendment puts the brakes on such research. I support Ms Tucker’s amendment, as I support the right to life and the rights of the unborn child, including the rights of human embryos not to be used for such as yet unfounded research.

MS DUNDAS (9.42): I want to make it clear that the Human Embryo (Research) Bill ensures that the ACT is part of a consistent national framework for the regulation of excess assisted reproductive technology embryos that would otherwise be allowed to succumb. It links the ACT into a national licensing committee of the National Health and Medical Research Council that will assess applications for licences to conduct research, train in ART techniques, maintain quality assurance in ART and examine the

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