Frances Fitzgerald (Fine Gael)

As we debate this Bill, it is fair to state that each Member of this House is now better informed on the issue of stem cell research and the use of adult and embryonic stem cells than we were some time ago. This is so because the debate has been brought to the floor of the House by Senator Mullen, which is welcome.

Many countries conduct much research in this area. Until recently, however, and given UCC's decision in particular, there has not been considerable public awareness of what is occurring. Ironically, when we heard last week of the stem cell research that led to a young Colombian woman receiving a new windpipe, the general population was given a new awareness of the research's potential and possible impact on lives. The woman was donated the windpipe of a deceased person. Cells were removed from it and replaced by her own to grow and implant an entirely new windpipe. All of a sudden, the woman's bleak prospects were transformed thanks to the use of adult stem cell research.

Recently, I read an article on the issue in The Sunday Times. It outlined how, five years from now, scientists will be able to grow a larynx from a patient's own stem cells and, within 20 years, it may well be possible to do the same in respect of colons, livers and even hearts. Furthermore, research is being carried out to grow nerve cells to treat brain diseases such as Alzheimer's and Parkinson's. All of this is occurring using adult stem cells, a welcome development. The British Medical Council is funding the use of embryonic stem cells to treat macular degeneration, an age-related blindness that affects thousands of people. Would someone offered this treatment use it if he or she believed it would be a cure? Ethical questions are involved.

As Senator Mullen stated, much of the research is still at an early stage. The European Science Foundation stated that it is essential to proceed with research on stem cells derived from embryos, foetal tissues and adults in parallel to learn more about how they can be used in treatment. Developments are occurring at a rapid rate and I am sure people will want to avail of these treatments and be able to access them in due course. Currently, Ireland finds itself in a legal vacuum, which was most recently witnessed when the governors of UCC voted narrowly in favour of effectively using imported embryos for stem cell research.

The Commission on Assisted Human Reproduction raised an interesting question, namely, whether science can be allowed to do what science can do. The answer is "No". There are limits and a need for a legal framework. The closest that many Irish people come to considering the use of excess embryos is IVF treatment. Infertility is an increasing problem owing to environmental and physical factors. It is not well understood. The commission stated, "Infertility can be a devastating experience causing enormous emotional pain which impacts on every aspect of a person's life." It goes on to state that "IVF forces society to face the question, whether for the first time in the history of mankind human embryos may be used for purposes other than human reproduction". This observation illustrates the close link between some aspects of the legislation before the House and IVF treatment, although Senator Mullen did make the point that he excluded IVF from the Bill.

I recommend that everyone read the comprehensive report of the Commission on Assisted Human Reproduction, especially as it takes a nuanced and interesting approach and engages in an in-depth consideration of research carried out across the globe. The report indicates that many countries have not yet introduced legislation in respect of this area. Questions arise as to what happens to spare embryos arising from IVF. Owing to the fact that there is no legislation in place, we do not know a great deal with regard to what occurs in laboratories or what happens to frozen embryos following a certain period.

I wish to place on record the most recent legal view from the courts in respect of embryos. Many Members will recall the recent case where the plaintiff and the defendant were married and where the plaintiff had IVF treatment resulting in the creation of frozen embryos. The couple subsequently separated and the defendant wanted the embryos destroyed while the plaintiff wanted to have them inserted in her uterus with the hope that she would become pregnant. In this case, M.R. v. T.R., the High Court decided in 2006 that the word "unborn" does not include embryos in vitro and, therefore, did not relate to the frozen embryos which were at the heart of this dispute. The case in question is currently before the Supreme Court. I refer to it as an example of our understanding, and that of the courts, of the terms relating to this matter.

Fine Gael is of the view that comprehensive legislation is necessary. There is a need to establish a wide-ranging statutory framework in the area of stem cell research and the use of embryos. This issue and the debate relating to it are complex and delicate. There are deeply held views among many people across the political spectrum in respect of it. Legislation in this area is, therefore, inevitably complex. Well-intended legislation may have complex and unintended results. Such legislation might even have an impact on the Constitution.

It is crucial that we have a legislative framework which demands that research carried out is informed by our society's values while recognising legitimate scientific enquiry in the human interest and also in the need for appropriate restraint. The issues under discussion are of fundamental importance. As the commission stated, in a diverse Irish society it is unlikely that any one set of ethical or moral principles could be acceptable to all.

I do not have time to outline the detail of what the commission recommended. However, it put forward detailed proposals on this matter. The Government has failed to act on any of the Commission's recommendations and a vacuum has been created. I call on the Government to bring forward legislation in respect of this area. By introducing the Bill, Senator Mullen has continued the tradition of the Seanad playing an important role in initiating and advancing crucial national debates on issues of immense importance.

I wish to make a number of points regarding my concerns about the Bill. I accept that the Bill specifically excludes IVF and I fully accept the bona fides of Senator Mullen in this regard. Nevertheless, I was in contact earlier today with a scientist who disputes this fact. There are incompatibilities between section 1(a) and section 1(b)(i) in respect of this matter. I am concerned by the implications of the term "outside the State", which is used on two occasions in the Bill. Does this term mean that an Irish person could not access treatment abroad?

Section 6 refers to the "responsible body". What constitutes a responsible body and to whom does the term "offence" apply? Fine Gael is concerned about some of the provisions that seek to criminalise people who may make donations of embryos. The position in the Bill in this regard is somewhat unclear. In Britain, the Warnock report stated that research on embryos could only be allowed up to 14 days.

I commend Senator Mullen on raising this issue and ensuring the Seanad once again leads the way on a major issue and embarks on a vital process wherein legislation must catch up with rapidly developing science. I have posed questions and made observations and comments. I hope these will contribute to the debate on this matter.