Last October the committee rejected the proposal, which would standardise rules across the EU, after fierce arguments over the ethics of advanced therapies.
The therapies affected would include stem-cell research, in which cells are taken from embryos at an early stage before their role in the body has been determined, and chimera technologies, in which animal cells can be used to develop a human cure.
The Commission proposed a similar approach to that taken already with the contraceptive pill. This would mean evaluating advanced therapy products on their quality, safety and efficacy but allowing member states to decide whether or not to use the products.
But opposition to stem-cell and chimera technologies in the Parliament was high enough to win support for several ‘ethical amendments’ and a final rejection of the proposal – a rare occurrence at committee level.
Pressure is mounting from patient groups, researchers and the biotech industry to find a solution before the full Parliament vote on the proposal next month.
A Parliamentary report on green biotechnology – more commonly known as genetic modification (GM) – has also run into controversy among MEPs.
The own-initiative report on ‘the benefits of green biotechnology’, from Liberal MEP Kyösti Virrankoski, will be voted on by the agricultural committee on 23 January.
Conservationists have criticised the report for being too positive about GM. “It is completely biased,” according to Helen Holder from Friends of the Earth Europe. But GM supporters welcome a first chance for Parliament to examine closely the possible advantages of GM cultivation. Previous reports have focused on the ‘co-existence’ of GM and conventional crops, or more generally on all biotech applications.
“We are pleased to see a parliamentarian wanting to open up a more rational, rather than emotional, debate,” said Simon Barber of biotech umbrella group Europabio.