IT was, said the MP, a “heartbreaking”

moment when Jessica Newall was carried into his Stockton office with a feeding tube leading into her nose.

Baby Jessica was “pretty in pink and seemingly content”, but the tragic reality is that she will not live much longer, perhaps only a year or two, Alex Cunningham said.

There is no cure for Jessica’s condition, which means her body will not develop and her internal organs will deteriorate, and which leaves her unable to communicate.

Mr Cunningham told ministers: “Perhaps worst of all, Jessica often wakes up screaming in terror and there is nothing her parents can do but hug her and comfort her.”

However, although there appears to be no hope for Jessica, future babies could be spared her suffering, which is why she was taken to meet the Stockton North MP.

Her parents, who live in Buckinghamshire but have relatives in the North-East, want MPs to give approval to mitochondrial replacement, a ground-breaking IVF technique to prevent such deadly DNA mutations.

They are not the only ones. The Newcastle University team which pioneered it is eager for the go-ahead and the Department of Health backed it earlier this year.

Most MPs who spoke in the Commons this week are in favour, as are the public who have the benefits explained rationally.

After all, the prize is sparing thousands of parents the agony of a child with a desperate future of muscle wasting, heart problems, vision loss, organ failure, epilepsy or muscular dystrophy — a future like Jessica’s.

It was expected that Parliament would vote on new regulations by the summer, paving the way for using healthy DNA from donor eggs from early next year.

But that vote has not been held yet and, reading the Health Minister’s response to the debate carefully, it is far from clear when — or if — it will.

Jane Ellison told MPs: “The Government will continue to consider the expert advice we have received, and how that influences regulations, before further debate.”

Puzzled, I asked the Department of Health what is going on, given that, as Mrs Ellison stated, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) advised the goahead last year?

The timing of the vote is “still up in the air”, I was told. But will it be before next May’s General Election?

Now, it may be that drawing up regulations is more complicated than expected, but I suspect another motive for delay.

This week’s debate was prompted by a 20-strong group of MPs who want the brakes slammed on change pending “more research”. Among the group are many of the “usual suspects” on the Tory benches, the Cameron-baiters opposed to gay marriage, overseas aid and EU membership.

And it’s only eight months to election day, the worst time for a party bust-up and sensational headlines about “genetically modified babies”… Lynton Crosby, the Prime Minister’s aide, calls it “getting the barnacles off the boat”

— dumping fringe policies to ram home core messages of an improving economy, tough on immigration, tougher on welfare.

Others might call it cowardice. I hope I’m wrong.