Kedgley Sue: Medicines (Specified Biotechnical Procedures)  Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Kedgley Sue: Medicines (Specified Biotechnical Procedures)  Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:625;Page:19765] 
SUE KEDGLEY (Green) 
: 
 The Green Party rises to support the Medicines (Specified Biotechnical Procedures) Amendment Bill which is essentially just a date-change. It is an extension of the moratorium so that legislation can be more thoughtfully developed in order ultimately for xenotransplantation to be covered by new human tissue legislation and therapeutic products legislation. Possibly there is no more important legislation this Parliament will consider than that covering xenotransplantation. It is crucial that we get that legislation right and do not rush into it and the Green Party is absolutely delighted that the Government is spending more time on it and is extending the moratorium so that we can give more thought to the legislation in the hope that we will get it right. 
Despite what has been said xenotransplantation is an issue with profound ethical and safety considerations. It involves crossing the species barrier between humans and animals that has existed for millennia. In that sense it involves tampering with the very basis of life and whatever our opponents say it does raise the possibly of disease transfer between species of crossover diseases from for example pigs to humans and of new infectious and possibly deadly viruses. There is no point in just dismissing those possibilities because there is experimental evidence to show that in some cases pig retroviruses have survived for long periods inside humans. We have all heard of the great panic about the possibility of bird flu emerging in South-east Asia. Why with that possibility looming would we rush to transfer something from animals into humans when that could raise the possibility of outbreaks such as mad cow disease and bird flu and of untreatable diseases? That is the reality. Some members of the Opposition will try to dismiss that but it is the truth and we need to acknowledge the truth. We cannot rush into legislation in this area. We need to take the time to get it right. 
There are many unknowns in the field of xenotransplantation and nobody really knows what the implications of it are. 
Hon Maurice Williamson 
: Why would bird flu be transferred through pigs? 
SUE KEDGLEY 
: Maurice Williamson is interjecting but he does not know what the implications of xenotransplantation are and nor does anyone in this House. So it is essential that all the issues are thoroughly investigated and that there is wide-ranging consultation and debate before any approvals are given for clinical trials. Let us not repeat the mistakes made with regard to genetic engineering by trying to introduce a new highly risky and controversial technology when there has not been a proper public debate on it or even a proper regulatory regime put in place. I believe that consultation is taking place on the issue. That is good. Let us not rush in where angels would fear to tread—let us tread very warily on this very important issue. 
Diabetes is the issue that most people raise when they talk about xenotransplantation. Of course it is a very difficult ethical and scientific decision to weigh up the possible benefits of xenotransplantation to individual diabetes sufferers against the possible risk it poses to the whole population. But the truth is that everyone likes a quick fix—a technological solution. Putting pigs’ organs into humans sounds like a great quick-fix solution to for example diabetes—that is the issue that has been most frequently mentioned in this context. But instead of looking at doing something as radical and with such political risks as xenotransplantation why do we not look in the first instance at the causes of diabetes and at some simple steps that we as a population could take which are right under our noses to try to prevent diabetes or reduce the epidemic of diabetes? Yes there is an epidemic and a huge increase in type 2 diabetes—about 127000 New Zealanders now suffer from diabetes—but why do we not look at the causes of that rather than try to think of quick-fix solutions? 
We know for example that a high-sugar diet is one of the causes of diabetes. A high-fat diet is another. We know that but what are we doing about it? We are doing very little. We allow children in taxpayer-funded schools to have access to vending machines. Cash-strapped schools use vending machines to sell high-sugar drinks in order to try to eke out a little bit of extra money. I am told that a big school can get about $12000 a year if it has a vending machine. So we allow the sale of high-sugar high-fat food which we know contributes to diabetes in our schools simply in order to help cash-strapped schools to earn a little money. We know that fast-food companies like McDonald’s sell high-sugar drinks and are synonymous with chips and burgers which are high-fat foods. So what are we doing to try to discourage our children from eating the sorts of foods that contribute to diabetes? We are participating in the marketing campaign of McDonald’s by putting its symbols on mobile dental clinics. We are getting fast-food companies to pay for essential public health services like mobile dental clinics. How crazy is that? On the one hand we want to rush around and engage in xenotransplantation—putting say pigs’ organs into humans—but on the other hand we are not prepared to do something as simple as take steps to reduce the amount of high-fat high-sugar food that our children are eating which we know contributes to diabetes. 
Indeed this Government— 
Dail Jones 
: This isn’t very relevant. 
SUE KEDGLEY 
: It is extremely relevant because one of the main things that has been mentioned about xenotransplantation is that it may offer a cure for diabetics. So it is entirely relevant that we should consider what we can do to try to reduce the incidence of diabetes rather than simply look at a high-tech solution at the end of the line. Frankly it is shocking that the Government allows a fast-food company to use its marketing symbols on mobile dental vans and allows such companies which sell the food that we know contributes to diabetes to fund core health services. If they did not sell the food that contributed to diabetes then it might be an interesting proposition. But that is the reality. Coca-Cola burgers and chips are the staple sorts of foods sold by those companies although some improvements are being made. Therefore we need to look much more widely at the whole issue of how we tackle diabetes. 
In the meantime we are pleased to support this bill. The Government is saying that we should get the legislation on xenotransplantation right and not rush into doing something about which there is such huge scientific uncertainty. If we did put pig organs into humans in order to try to solve the problem of diabetes and if we got it wrong and it resulted in a retrovirus—such as the equivalent of a new form of bird flu or of bovine spongiform encephalopathy—it would be a disaster for humanity. It would open Pandora’s box. There is no more important legislation that we should spend time on getting right than the legislation on xenotransplantation. We strongly support this bill.