Natasha Stott Despoja (SA, Australian Democrats) Share this | Hansard source

Chair, through you to Senator McLucas, my understanding is that it is not problematic to remove that definition as we are seeking to do. We are concerned that defining unsuitable for implantation embryos entirely separately from excess ART embryos is where the problem occurs. That is why we are seeking to remove that separate definition. I am happy, however, to acknowledge Senator Patterson’s comments and to take her assurance that that will not mean that there are some circumstances under which embryos that are unsuitable for implantation cannot be used. That was our concern; we had dealt with it under the excess ART just to make it clearer, or so we thought. But this way, with a separate definition, actually might bring up circumstances where you cannot use those embryos, and we did not want to create that circumstance. I am happy with the clarification that has been put forward. I have questions, but rather than going round and round I am happy to leave it at that. We may seek further clarification down the track, see how this operates and make sure that we do not run into any problems with those particular embryos.