Wilson et al: English Legal System Directions 
Practical examples
Test bankWilson et al: English Legal System Directions
Legislation
Question
Private Members' Bills are nothing but attention-seeking publicity stunts and should be abolished, which would allow Parliament more time to concentrate on government bills. It would also allow Parliament more time to properly scrutinise delegated legislation.
Discuss the validity of this view of the legislative process.
Answer Guidance
This answer requires an understanding of the legislative process, the differences between government and private members' bills, and the difference between primary and delegated legislation.
Answers should briefly summarize the legislative process used for creating primary legislation: every bill must receive a 1st reading, a 2nd reading (discussion of underlying principles), a Committee stage (detailed examination and assessment of amendments), a Report (review of committee stage) and a 3rd reading (final opportunity for amendments) in both Houses before receiving Royal assent (a formality).
Answers should explain the general concept of Private Members' Bills (ideas for legislation put forward by back-bench MPs) and the different types of them – the four varieties of Ballot, Ten Minute Rule, Presentation, and Peers' Bills. Answers should acknowledge that very few of these become Acts of Parliament but that does not necessarily mean that they should be written off as "attention-seeking publicity stunts". Often they are serious attempts at getting the law changed but fail for various reasons (often simply lack of time).
Answers should explain Government Bills and note the fact that such Bills almost always lead to Acts of Parliament, because the government exercises control over the Parliamentary timetable and has various other devices at its disposal to ensure that bills do not fail for lack of time (e.g. the guillotine and programme motions).
Answers should consider whether Private Members' Bills are 'nothing but attention-seeking publicity stunts'. Students could point out how some major legislation has resulted from Private Members' Bills, either directly (e.g. the Abortion Act 1967) or indirectly (in the sense that the government has taken on the proposal and introduced a government bill (e.g. Hunting Act 2004)). It may also be noted that, although very few Private Members' Bills actually lead to Acts (with Ballot bills having about 25% success rate but the others less than 5%) the publicity generated can be valuable in itself.
Answers should consider whether Parliament needs more time to scrutinize government bills. There is an opportunity here for general criticism of the legislative process, e.g. is it unnecessarily repetitive? Students might note that the guillotine and programme motion are designed to free up parliamentary time; the use of Public Bill committees allows for several bills to be proceeding through Parliament simultaneously, and the relatively new option of carrying over Bills allows for more time to discuss their contents and implications.
Answers should explain delegated legislation (typically Statutory Instruments made by government ministers under powers contained in primary legislation), and the purpose of the laying procedures presently in place designed to secure effective scrutiny. Students should consider the efficiency of these procedures and note the criticisms of the negative laying procedure in particular. Students could refer to the highly technical and/or specialized nature of most SIs especially given the fact that MPs need no special qualifications for a seat in Parliament, the sheer volume of delegated legislation, the need to sometimes produce delegated legislation at speed in emergencies, etc in order to demonstrate the flaws in any scrutiny process.
Conclusion: Private Members' Bills are not simply 'attention-seeking publicity stunts'. Abolition of Private Members' Bills to allow for more time to discuss government bills is probably unnecessary as Parliament already has a number of tools at its disposal to ensure government bills are scrutinized effectively. Parliamentary scrutiny of delegated legislation could be improved because the sheer volume and technical nature of this legislation makes any form of effective scrutiny difficult.
View print version