House of Representatives agrees to a significant expansion of the Embryo Act

There is a “difference of opinion” among his supporters about the bill, said CDA faction leader Henri Bontenbal. His parliamentary faction “struggled with the weight of the choice.” And so the CDA voted divided in the House of Representatives on Tuesday on the sensitive proposal to expand the Embryo Act; twelve CDA members voted in favor (including Bontenbal himself), six against.

With the support of the CDA, the proposal received a large majority, 90 compared to 59; Some JA21 MPs also voted in favor. In most parties, medical-ethical issues are considered a free issue: MPs can decide for themselves whether they vote for or against.

It revolves around the private member’s bill by Jan Paternotte (D66) and Harry Bevers (VVD) to lift the ban on cultivating embryos for scientific research. Examining embryos in the first days should increase the chance of successful IVF treatments. Only 25 percent of treatments are now successful. In addition, research could also provide knowledge about tackling, for example, hereditary diseases or serious genetic abnormalities.

Only residual embryos

According to the Embryo Act of 2002, research may now only be conducted on remaining embryos that are not used by prospective parents after an IVF process. But those embryos are three to five days old; therefore too old for proper research into the early stages of fertilization, say Paternotte and Bevers.

The Embryo Act assumed that the breeding ban would be temporary and would be lifted if there was social support for it. There have been three legal evaluations in recent decades, all three of which concluded that the ban could be lifted, but that did not happen.

The proposal by Paternotte and Bevers, which still has to pass the Senate, is particularly sensitive within the CDA. The party still has to have this discussion internally, critics say, but Tuesday’s vote already came in between. Moreover, Bontenbal said in his explanation of vote on Tuesday that the internal discussion within the party has already been held.

Influence on formation

The vote on the Embryo Act is about more than just the sensitivity of the law itself; the outcome is also significant for the negotiations of the forming parties D66, VVD and CDA. There is a good chance that those three will soon look to the right for support for their plans. The radical right JA21 would in any case be necessary – as a coalition partner or through tolerating support – but then the seats of those four parties only add up to 75. Support from a smaller party is then necessary to achieve a majority.

The small Christian parties SGP (three seats) and Christian Union (also three) are the obvious choice, but it is precisely those parties that are now angry about the support of the forming parties for the expansion of the Embryo Act. They were there before too not amused about the adopted VVD motion on the clash between Article 1 (equal treatment) and Article 23 (freedom of education) of the Constitution. The VVD motion asks to investigate whether Article 1 can be placed above Article 23.

‘Risky’

Both decisions are bad for SGP and ChristenUnie. The SGP in particular is extremely critical, as was evident last week in a debate on the informant’s final report. Member of Parliament Diederik van Dijk called it “risky to push through a number of controversial proposals now, without taking much into account of minorities, while in the future you will be dependent on broad support in the House.” He asked VVD leader Dilan Yesilgöz whether she understands “that we will not cooperate positively in such files if, for example, classical freedoms or the protection of unborn life are being destroyed with the other hand.”

Christian Union faction leader Mirjam Bikker also pointed out that “experiments with freedom of education and stretching medical ethics undermine the foundation of broad support from the House.” In an opinion article in The Telegraph Van Dijk and Bikker also complained in November about the bad timing of this “controversial and risky proposal”.

Cuts to healthcare

If SGP and ChristenUnie put their words into words, there appear to be few parties left that can support the possible new coalition. There is another stumbling block for the support of an alternative party, 50Plus: cuts in healthcare. The three negotiating parties all want to cut billions in healthcare, partly to pay for higher defense spending. The elderly party does not want to take money away from healthcare at all. For example, 50Plus does not want to keep the deductible at 385 euros (like D66) or increase it to 440 euros (like VVD, CDA), but rather reduce it. The party also wants structural investments in elderly care and nursing homes.

CDA leader Bontenbal said last week in the debate against the angry SGP and Christian Union that it would be “good” to make agreements on sensitive topics – such as medical ethics. Apparently this did not yet apply to the expansion of the Embryo Act. According to Bontenbal, there has been an “extensive and careful debate” about this proposal in Parliament.

Give a gift





Part





Email the editor

The journalistic principles of NRC