In May 2008 in the abortion amendments to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill (now Act), Clive Efford voted to keep the current time limit of 24 weeks in line with the scientific and medical consensus.
In February 2015 Clive Efford voted in favour of allowing mitochondrial donation, which would allow women who carried mitochondrial diseases to give birth to children who would not inherit the disease. An October 2014 briefing report by the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA), which had been investigating the issue for three years, stated that there was no evidence to show that mitochondrial donation was unsafe. However, some religious groups had said that such procedures should not be allowed. After clearing both Houses mitochondrial donation is now legal, regulated by the HFEA.
In 2006, MPs were asked three questions by the Rough Guide's Mark Ellingham on how seriously they took climate change as politicians and as responsible, active citizens. Clive Efford replied:
- "1: I believe this is the most important issue facing our generation.Failure to act would have devastating consequences for future generations.
- 2: Britain must demonstrate that it is doing its fair share to tackle GHGs. Stern sets out the environmental and economic imperatives for doing this. We must use what ever international influence we have to put this issue at the top of the international agenda."
In February 2010, Clive Efford signed Early Day Motion 524: Recognising Climate Change which states that "this House agrees that climate change is happening and is man-made" and calls this statement a "fact, which has the support of the overwhelming majority of the scientific community".
In January 2011, Clive Efford signed Early Day Motion 767: Science is Vital Campaign. The motion stated that the house "believes that continued investment in research is vital in order to meet the technological and social challenges of the 21st century, and to continue to attract high-tech industries to invest here; further believes that large cuts to science funding are a false economy, due to evidence that research investment fuels economic growth".
EDM 767 was proposed before the results of the October 2010 comprehensive spending review, which was expected to contain significant cuts to science funding. However, by the time Efford signed the motion, the Conservative/LibDem coalition government had already announced the spending review's conclusions and cuts to science were significantly less than anticipated, with the government apparently echoing some of the language of the Science is Vital Campaign.
Why not help us expand this page with more details of this politician's positions on sceptical issues?
- E-Mail them to ask for their opinions (and tell us about it by editing this page!)
- Check their voting record and other details at the External Links above.
- Search the media for mentions of them and their positions on issues.
- Use your own brilliant ideas - but make sure you can back them up with a citation!