House of Lords debates HFEA

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) was once again the
topic of a debate in the House of Lords on 1 February 2011. Following the
proposed abolition of the HFEA and the Human Tissue Authority (HTA), Baroness
Glenys Thornton asked how the UK government will maintain public confidence and
patient safety.

Baroness Thornton drew attention to that 'UK legislation on these matters is
the envy and the blueprint for the world' and that more than 200 hours were
spent scrutinising and debating the legislation that established the HFEA'. She
said 'the public have learnt to trust the HFEA and, indeed, the HTA' and raised
concerns regarding who would take on the role as 'a bulwark between the
sensational headlines in the less responsible press and those who are working
in the field' if either of these bodies were abolished, and questioned whether
the Care Quality Commission (CQC) was suitable.

'I am not opposed to change and improvement and I am not opposed to these
proposals for the sake of it. I support change to make organisations more
effective…by changing regulatory functions or by testingto see whether functions could be performed more effectively elsewhere', said Baroness
Thornton.

She added: 'I suggest that public confidence in this area is best
established through the independence of the bodies that regulate - the HTA and
the HFEA - and that the Government need to rethink their proposals'.

Baroness Thornton's concerns about how the ethical and safeguarding
functions might satisfactorily be carried out if HFEA and HTA were abolished
were echoed by several peers. Lord Willis of Knaresborough explained: 'it is
the lack of clarity over what is proposed, the lack of any consultation on the
proposals, and in particular the lack of any public involvement in these
proposals that makes me concerned about the future functions of both the HTA
and the HFEA'.

Baroness Ruth Deech, former chair of the HFEA, said that placing the
regulation with the CQC is 'misguided' and there will be 'no improvement in
public confidence'. She said the public will not be persuaded that embryos will
be treated with respect and 'there will be bounds on embryo research if it is
handed over to unknowns and not the accountable and expert figures of the
HFEA'.

On the other hand, Lord Robert Winston felt it was rather 'delightful' to support
the Minister and the government's position. He stated that the Human Fertilisation
and Embryology (HFE) Act was 'at the time an essential piece of legislation,
which has now passed its day' and was 'no longer necessary'. 'The research that
it regulates is not really suitable for regulation by the HFEA', he said.

In response to the debate, the Health Minister Earl Frederick Howe said a
public consultation on the reallocation will take place over the summer. He said
the plans 'do not represent any threat to patient safety, nor to the safeguards
held within the legislative framework of provisions within the HFE Act and the
Human Tissue Act'. Instead, he said, it is about 'streamlining the functions of
the regulatory bodies concerned'.

'The burden of bureaucracy will be lessened overall for the NHS and other
organisations', he explained.