Hutchison Paul: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Hutchison Paul: Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:15899] 
Dr PAUL HUTCHISON (National—Port Waikato) 
: 
 It is with great pleasure that I speak on Part 1 “Preliminary provisions” of this Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Bill which deals particularly with the purposes the principles and the areas of procedures or treatments that can be declared to be established procedures. 
Undoubtedly we have seen a revolution of treatment in this reproductive field particularly since 1978 when the first test-tube baby was born. But what has to be realised is that there is a whole spectrum of treatments available to a modern society which may go from very simple treatments such as ovulation induction or sperm production improvement to the more complex technologies. I think it is important that it is clearly spelt out in the purposes clause that the bill is to secure the benefits of assisted reproductive procedures and established procedures for mainstream society. 
I have noted from various groups who have opposed this bill such as some individual Roman Catholics or even some Maori that they find it difficult to accept some of the modern technologies that are available. But in reality as a former practising clinician in this field I have found no group who has not wanted for one reason or another to take advantage of those assisted reproductive technologies. Undoubtedly there is the reality of a need among all groups in society that I know of to take advantage of their benefits. 
What clearly is contentious are some of the complex technologies to do with cloning hybridisation and further possibilities that might be associated with stem cells. Part 1 through the schedules makes clear provision to prohibit unacceptable assisted reproductive procedures. Undoubtedly in schedule 1 we have a list of procedures that are unacceptable to mainstream society. That list is likely to grow and through the provisions of this bill to change from time to time but it is unlikely to be changed without considerable deliberation and care. 
The other aspect of the purposes clause that I think is worth while commenting on is the establishment of a comprehensive information-keeping regime to ensure that people born from donated embryos or donated cells can find out about their genetic origins. There is no doubt that one of the major thrusts of the submissions we had is that people do indeed want to find out about their backgrounds. One of the major philosophies behind this bill is the promotion of the ethos of openness which I think is absolutely appropriate. 
It is also vital that clear records are kept to ensure that morbidity and mortality are recorded so that successful procedures can be monitored. Again there is a set of principles spelt out clearly to ensure that the health and well-being of children born as a result should be an important consideration in all decisions about procedures. At one stage of events it was to be a paramount consideration but undoubtedly the practicality is that all people involved in procedures do have a degree of risk. It is vital that risks to men women and children are all taken into account as being seriously important. I do think that the Health Committee perhaps has become a little politically correct when it not only pointed out that the needs—