Steve Fielding (Victoria, Family First Party) Share this | Hansard source

Family First wants cures as much as anyone else. Family First wants scientists to find cures to all manner of debilitating diseases. I cannot stress that enough. However, it is wrong to peddle false hope to some of the most vulnerable members of our community that cures are imminent. And it is disturbing that so many people are doing so. As world-renowned stem cell expert Professor James Sherley said recently:

The idea that research on human embryos will yield an amazing medicine chest of new cures for debilitating diseases of children and adults is a myth. Nothing could be further from the truth.

We need to inject a serious dose of reality into this debate on the Prohibition of Human Cloning for Reproduction and the Regulation of Human Embryo Research Amendment Bill 2006a debate which is about cloning, not embryonic stem cells, because the law already allows research on human embryos. It is not a debate about the promise of miracle cures from cloning.

To properly examine this issue we need to focus on the scientific facts. It is clear from evidence presented to the Senate committee that cloning human embryos will not produce the cures we all desire. A number of scientists gave evidence that embryonic stem cells from cloned embryos will not be able to be used for cell therapies. Only adult stem cells can repair adult tissue.

Another aspect of this debate is the ethics around cloning. It is right for parliament to set ethical boundaries around science to reflect medical standards and community concern. In summary, Family First strongly opposes cloning human embryos for research for three reasons: firstly, the science, which tells us this will not produce the much hyped miracle cures; secondly, the exploitation of Australian women where there are health dangers for women whose eggs will be needed for cloning; and, thirdly, the fact that cloning human embryos crosses a major ethical line because, for the first time, we would be deliberately creating a human being with the intention of destroying it.

I will now expand on these points. Firstly, the science tells us that cloning human embryos will not produce the cures we all desire. Scientists revealed to the Senate inquiry that to use human embryonic stem cells in therapies you first have to turn them into adult stem cells so that they can work in an adult or a child. Professor Sherley says:

... embryonic stem cells cannot fulfil the job of adult stem cells and mature tissues because they were designed by Mother Nature to work in the embryo and not in the adult.

Not only is there a lack of evidence that embryonic stem cells from cloned human embryos can produce cures; here we have evidence that they cannot be used unless they are turned into adult stem cells. Surely the best option is to put all our effort and all our money into adult stem cell research, which we know works.

Speaking of adult stem cells, Professor Sherley also tells us that they are:

... the only type of stem cells for which there are current clinical treatments. Transplantation of bone marrow ... to restore blood cell production is a well-known adult stem cell therapy.

It is worth noting that the advice to government from MP Consulting was that, since changes to the law in 2002, there have been no scientific advances that would justify the ban on cloning being lifted. The only advance the Lockhart committee could point to was the embryo cloning work done in South Korea, which was later found to be a complete fraud.

To those who claim Australia will go backward if we do not allow cloning, I again turn to Professor Sherley, who said:

Stopping the production of cloned embryos for research will not deny Australians the opportunity for benefits in the form of new cures ... because embryonic stem cells provide no path at all.

Frank Brennan, a Jesuit scholar and professor, emphasised that nothing has happened since 2002 to justify a change. Professor Brennan said:

The science has not changed, the moral arguments have not changed, community standards have not changed. It should take more than a handful of scientists seeking out more value free research environments for our politicians to change their conscience vote.

I will now turn to the issue of the exploitation of Australian women. To clone embryos, you need a supply of eggs. The only source of human eggs in Australia is from the ovaries of Australian women. I must stress that we are talking here about the need for thousands and thousands of eggs. The discredited Korean cloning research team used more than 2,000 eggs for no result. It took 277 attempts to clone Dolly the sheep, who then had to be put down because she was defective. Clearly, taking large numbers of eggs from Australian women poses dangers to their health, and we must remember that such invasive procedures have no direct benefit for the women involved.

As the Women’s Forum Australia told the Senate inquiry:

It is irresponsible and premature to allow research cloning without identifying a viable source of ova that is safe for women.

                 …         …           …

Only a few years after the legalisation of research cloning in the UK, the licensing authority has begun to authorise commercial incentives for supplying ova for research ...

In other words, we know that deals are being done in the United Kingdom—deals between scientists and women—to extract women’s eggs in return for all manner of rewards. Surely we cannot say yes to such a trade in Australia. Family First acknowledges that our legislation prevents payment for women’s eggs, but the UK started out that way as well. It would be so wrong for this parliament to give a green light to a process that will inevitably lead scientists to bargain for Australian women’s eggs.

Finally, I will turn to the ethics of the cloning debate. As Dr Megan Best explained:

Ethical boundaries in medical research have not caused medical research to stop progressing, but instead have moved it forward by promoting creative solutions ...

While we know that politicians have a habit of quoting polls that suit them, we might have expected more from the Lockhart committee, which was established to provide what we had hoped would be unbiased advice. It is unfortunate that members of this committee ignored the only poll on Australian attitudes about cloning published in an academic journal, which showed that a majority of Australians did not want embryo cloning, and instead focused on polls which supported cloning.

While our media have featured stories of sick people living in hope of cures from cloning, it is important to point out that not all people suffering from illness have swallowed this pill. James Kelly, a US man who is wheelchair-bound following a spinal injury, opposes cloning. He said:

I’m paralysed from the chest down, with my life and dreams depending on the successful, efficient use of medical research resources. So it’s not in my interests to grab at straws instead of looking at scientifically proven facts ... The simple truth is that therapeutic cloning is a colossal sham designed to draw crucial research resources down a fruitless path with no end in sight.

The case for overturning the ban on cloning embryos has no scientific legs. Family First urges senators to vote against this legislation.