In May 2008 in the abortion amendments to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill (now Act), Kevin Brennan voted to keep the current time limit of 24 weeks in line with the scientific and medical consensus.
In February 2015 Kevin Brennan 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. Kevin Brennan replied:
- "1: It is a very important concern, and one we should take a lead on internationally.
- 2: Legislate domestically to reduce our emissions and taske the lead in brokering international agreement.
- 3: Buy my food from local organic supplier and market."
In October 2010, Kevin Brennan 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".
Libel Law Reform
- "As a Minister and a member of the Government parliamentary protocol prevents my signing Early Day Motions; however please be assured that I have drawn your letter to the attention of the Rt Hob Jack Straw MP, Secretary of State for Justice."
Response to Skeptical Voter Candidate Survey 2010
Questions were sent by email and written exactly as asked. Kevin Brennan's responses were received by email on 02/05/2010.
1. Do you support the use of public funds to provide unproven health products such as homeopathy?
2. Do you think that abortion time limits should always be determined by the current scientific and medical consensus?
3. Do you agree that testing on animals (within strict criteria) is a necessary part of the development of medicines?
4. Should schools be allowed to teach creationism as an equivalent theory to evolution?
5. Should religious courts such as Sharia and Beth Din be recognised as alternative systems within UK law?
6. Do you believe that religious belief should be legally protected from ridicule?
7. Should religious leaders be entitled to vote in the House of Lords?
Answer: No (i.e. should be elected).
8. Should an independent government adviser whose views in their area of expertise conflict with government policy be able to express those views publicly without fear of being sacked?
Answer: Should be governed by an agreed protocol.
9. Should policy-makers trust scientific evidence even when it appears counter-intuitive?
Answer: Yes, but ultimately Ministers are there to take decisions and be accountable for them.
10. Do you support the reform of English and Welsh libel law to allow a stronger 'public interest' defence?
Why not help us expand this page with more details of this politician's positions on skeptical and other 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 listed 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!