Minutes of the Council meeting held on 23 June 2004
Mon, 19 July 2004
Council (04) 3rd Meeting
NUFFIELD COUNCIL ON BIOETHICS
Minutes of the Meeting held at 28 Bedford Square, London WC1B 3JS
on 23 June 2004 at 10.30 am
PRESENT:
Professor Sir Bob Hepple QC FBA (Chairman)
Professor Catherine Peckham (Deputy Chair)
Professor Tom Baldwin
Professor Sir Kenneth Calman
Professor Peter Lipton
Baroness Perry of Southwark
Professor Martin Raff
Professor Peter Smith
Dr Alan Williamson
APOLOGIES: Professor Peter Harper, The Rt Reverend Richard Harries, Mr Nick Ross, Professor Dame Marilyn Strathern, Professor Herbert Sewell
SECRETARIAT: Dr Sandy Thomas, Dr Catherine Moody, Harald Schmidt, Nicola Perrin, Caroline Rogers, Julia Fox, Elaine Talaat-Abdalla and Mun-Keat Looi
The Chairman expressed members’ appreciation to Nicola Perrin, the Public Liaison Manager, for her invaluable contribution to the Council’s work. Nicola would be leaving in September, to take up a Master’s Course in Bioscience Enterprise at Cambridge University.
MINUTES OF (04) 2nd MEETING
1 It was agreed that, following a minor amendment, the Minutes were an accurate record of the previous meeting.
MATTERS ARISING
LEGISLATION ON THE USE OF HUMAN TISSUE
2 The Public Liaison Manager described recent developments in the progress of the Human Tissue Bill. It was noted that there was to be a delay while changes were incorporated, to reflect the concerns expressed by the biomedical community, including the Council. The Third Reading of the Bill would be in the House of Commons on 28th June, after which it would pass to the House of Lords. A digest of the proceedings would be circulated to members of the Council.
CHAIRMAN’S ITEMS
MEMBERSHIP
Council (04) 25
3 The Subgroup on Membership had met on 25th May to consider suggestions for candidates to join the Council, primarily in the areas of the Law and Political Science. For these areas, the Council endorsed the recommendations of the Subgroup.
4 The possibility of including additional expertise in the area of the social sciences was also discussed. It was agreed that a number of names should be considered.
5 There followed a discussion on the overall balance of membership, between academic and other forms of expertise. The Council’s experience had been that members who were practitioners, for example in a discipline such as the law or broadcasting, provided a valuable perspective that it was important to retain. In principle, there would be no objection to including Members of Parliament, providing they were not in government. The Chairman asked members to forward suggestions to the Secretariat before the next Council meeting for consideration by the Membership Subgroup.
6 The issue of cross membership with committees of the Council’s three sponsors responsible for funding the Nuffield Council was also discussed. It was agreed that existing practice should continue: members should declare their interest and leave the room for relevant discussions at Council meetings as appropriate.
JOINT MEETING WITH THE HUMAN GENETICS COMMISSION
7 Members noted the agenda and arrangements for the joint meeting with the Secretariat and members of the Human Genetics Commission, which would take place that afternoon.
GOVERNMENT REVIEW OF ARMS’ LENGTH BODIES
8 The Chairman reported on the Government Review of Arms’ Length Bodies, which might include consideration of whether a National Bioethics Commission should be established. A meeting with Lord Warner would take place the next day to discuss the matter further.
9 Members observed that strengths of the Nuffield Council included its independence and freedom to select members and topics. If a National Commission were to focus on short term analysis concerning ethical issues of the day, there might be scope for it to co-exist with the Council.
MAIN BUSINESS
WORKING PARTY ON THE ETHICS OF RESEARCH INVOLVING ANIMALS
Council (04) 26
10 The Chair of the Working Party reported on how the previous comments by the Council had been incorporated into the current draft. Members were content with the amendments and were also satisfied with progress on the overall structure and content of present draft Report. Subject to revisions being made in the light of the discussion and any further written comments, it was agreed that the Report should be sent for peer review.
11 The Report would be re-considered at the October meeting, in light of the comments from peer reviewers. The final draft of the Report would be considered by the Council at the meeting in January 2005. Subject to the Council’s endorsement, the intention was to publish in the Spring of 2005.
12 The Council agreed that (with prior permission) the responses received during the consultation period should be placed on the website when the Report was published. This should become common practice for Council Reports and in the future, advance permission should be sought at the point of seeking comments.
SEMINAR ON THE WAY WE REASON:
DELIVERATION, CONSULTATION AND POLICY IN BIOETHICS
Council (04) 27
13 The seminar on The Way We Reason had been stimulating and useful in suggesting ideas for how the Council might improve its practices, for example whether it might develop a statement of policy on its bioethics approach, whether it achieved the right balance between consultation and fact-finding exercises or should do more; and whether it should continue, from time to time, to commission research in specialist areas to assist discussions. It was suggested that the methodology used by Working Parties might be made more explicit at the beginning of Reports, and that studies might be commissioned on how the public’s views could be canvassed. Although the Council did not anticipate that such studies would need to be commissioned, Working Parties should have the freedom to decide upon the most appropriate methods of consultation.
WORKING PARTY ON THE ETHICS OF PROLONGING LIFE IN FETUSES AND THE NEWBORN
Council (04) 28
14 Members welcomed the announcement that Professor Margot Brazier (University of Manchester) had accepted the Chairman’s invitation to chair the Working Party. Agreement had been reached with Professor Brazier on membership of the Working Party and letters of invitation would be sent shortly.
WORKSHOP ON THE ETHICS OF PUBLIC HEALTH
Council (04) 29
15 The Deputy Director reported that planning for the Workshop was nearly complete; a good level of attendance was anticipated. Following discussions both during the meeting and over lunch, the draft programme, including the timings, was modified so that Professor Calman might provide an over-arching perspective following the Chairman’s introduction. Professor Baldwin also kindly agreed to provide a short introduction to the session on the ethics of public health if a replacement speaker could not be found. Finally the concluding session was shortened to allow more time for general discussion.
HRRDC II SOUTH AFRICA
Council (04) 30
16 The Public Liaison Manager updated the Council on progress with the Report of the meeting. Drafting was nearly complete and delegates had been contacted to provide examples to illustrate the various issues discussed. The Council endorsed the proposals for peer reviewers and noted that the Report would be sent for peer review during the summer. The Chairman congratulated the Secretariat on keeping expenditure for the Workshop within the agreed budget.
DIRECTOR’S REPORT
BI-LATERAL MEETING WITH NATIONALER ETHIKRAT GERMANY
Council (04) 31
17 The Director set out the arrangements for the forthcoming meeting with the Nationaler Ethikrat from Germany. The primary topic for discussion would be the ethics of public health, although there would also be a preliminary session on the regulation of reproductive and therapeutic cloning, at the request of Professor Simitis, the Chairman of the Nationale Ethikrat. Some modifications to the programme were suggested. The Chairman suggested that a scientist working in the area should introduce the session on therapeutic cloning. This was agreed. Members noted that a final version of the programme and some background information would be circulated prior to the meeting.
GENETIC SCREENING
Council (04) 32
18 The Public Liaison Manager reported that an intern (Mr Thomas McBride) had been appointed to draft a background paper over the summer period. He would be advised by the Steering Group appointed to consider this topic, which would meet in July. At the October meeting, the Council would be asked to consider the paper, together with advice from the Group for the purpose of deciding the form of follow up to the Report
FIVE YEAR FUNDING BID
19 The Director reported that discussions with the funders had been initiated. The Council’s bid for renewed funding was likely to be assessed by a panel of experts appointed by each funder. As part of the proposal, the Secretariat would be preparing evidence to illustrate the impact of the Council’s Reports and recommendations. All members would be asked to comment on drafts of the proposal. Detailed advice would be provided by a Subgroup of members appointed to assist with the final bid. There were important strategic issues to decide at an early stage, such as whether the Council should continue in its present mode or change the balance between in depth consideration of topics, and the provision of more rapid responses to topical issues. Some of the issues raised by the recent seminar on the Way We Reason might be also taken into account.
TO REPORT
BIOETHICS BRIEFING:
ACTIVITIES OF OTHER ORGANISATIONS
Council (04) 33
20 The Briefing was received and noted.
DELCARATION ON UNIVERSAL NORMS IN BIOETHICS BY THE INTERNATIONAL BIOETHICS COMMITTEE OF UNESCO
Council (04) 34
21 The Assistant Director explained that the international Bioethics Committee (IBC) of UNESCO was currently drafting a Declaration on Universal Norms in Bioethics. A first draft would be published for consultation in July 2004.
FINANCIAL REPORT: MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTS TO 31 DECEMBER 2003
Council (04) 35
22 The Management Accounts for the period up to 30 April 2004 were received and noted.
COUNCIL’S REVISED DRAFT WORK PLAN FOR 2004/2005
Council (04) 36
23 The Council’s revised Draft Work Plan was received and noted.
ANY OTHER BUSINESS
24 It was agreed that as the final version of the Report on The ethics of research involving animals would be presented to the Council in January, the date for the meeting would be moved to Thursday 20 January 2005. Though this left rather a short gap between meetings, the date of 17 March 2005 would remain. The March meeting could focus on the draft funding application. Consideration would also be given to changing the date of the October meeting because it coincided with Yom Kippur.
QUARTERLY BULLETIN
Information (04) 05
25 For information.
WEB REPORT
Information (04) 06
26 The web report figures were tabled noted.
REMAINING MEETING DATES FOR 2004
Thursday 14 October 10.30 am
MEETING DATES FOR 2005
Thursday 20 January 10.30 am*
Thursday 17 March 10.30 am
Wednesday 22 June 10.30 am
Thursday 13 October 10.30 am (provisional)
Full-day Forward Look meeting 12 May
*Please note change from previously announced date
All meetings will be held at 28 Bedford Square.
Last Updated Mon, 19 July 2004