MPs bite back over genetics watchdog

May 3, 1996

The Government has decided to review its decision not to set up a human genetics commission following an angry outcry from MPs who originally proposed the body.

The idea of a commission came from the House of Commons select committee on science and technology last July after its inquiry into developments in genetics. The commission could, it suggested, oversee progress in gene patenting, genetic medicines and possible use of genetic information by the insurance industry and employers.

The Government disagreed, arguing that bodies already exist to do this. Select committee MPs attacked the decision, said the Government's response was "complacent and ignorant" and immediately announced a further inquiry.

A spokesman for the Department of Health confirmed this week that minister Stephen Dorrell is reviewing the Government's original decision following further questioning from the committee.

Jeremy Bray, Labour member of the select committee said: "The Government has had second thoughts but we do not know whether it will lead to a committee or a commission, or what its powers or membership will be."

Spencer Batiste, Conservative select committee member said: "We detected a very significant shift in Government's views in our latest hearings on the matter. We believe that its original response was based on a lack of understanding of what the committee was saying in its report. And that is why I am confident about the outcome. Genetics is a fast-moving field that Government must have advice on."

You've reached your article limit.

Register to continue

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Most Commented

James Fryer illustration (27 July 2017)

It is not Luddism to be cautious about destroying an academic publishing industry that has served us well, says Marilyn Deegan

Jeffrey Beall, associate professor and librarian at the University of Colorado Denver

Creator of controversial predatory journals blacklist says some peers are failing to warn of dangers of disreputable publishers

Hand squeezing stress ball
Working 55 hours per week, the loss of research periods, slashed pensions, increased bureaucracy, tiny budgets and declining standards have finally forced Michael Edwards out
Kayaker and jet skiiers

Nazima Kadir’s social circle reveals a range of alternative careers for would-be scholars, and often with better rewards than academia

hole in ground

‘Drastic action’ required to fix multibillion-pound shortfall in Universities Superannuation Scheme, expert warns