Private Bills only affect a limited area or range of persons. If they only relate to one or two people then they are referred to as Personal Bills. These Bills are less common than Public Bills and they are put forward by outside bodies or campaigners. An outside company brought the Mersey Tunnels Act 2004, which enables local transport authorities in Merseyside to use surplus money from the operational of road toll schemes for the improvement of local public transport services, forward. These types of bills have their own separate procedures in Parliament, this allows for outside objections. A private bill could be called a hybrid bill if it has a wider significance but still only affects a small number of people, like the recent Crossrail Bill.
The formal process of statute creation is long and time consuming. The process has six steps for the House of Commons to follow with the first five steps being repeated by the House of Lords. The House of Lords are limited in their role in law making as they can only prolong a bill being made or make amendments, ultimately they cannot prevent the House of Commons from passing an Act for more than a year. If the House of Lords take more than a year to assent to a certain bill then the House of Commons may use the Parliament Act 1911 and 1949 to push the bill through Parliament and straight to the Royal Assent, the House of Commons used this process to push through the Hunting Act 2004.
To begin with a first reading commences, this is more of a formality and only introduces the bill to Parliament, so that the MPs can prepare a further debate.
With the first reading over with the bill moves to the more important second reading. This is where the Minister proposing the Bill explains the main aims and objectives of the Bill. The Minister then answers any questions regarding the Bill and after that more often than not a debate takes place. Once the debate is done a vote takes place and if the Bill if the Bill is given enough support then it moves onto the Committee Stage.
The is one of the most significant stages in the Bill process through the Houses as it is the first time the Bill is heard in it’s whole format. The committee looks over the bill in a detailed examination and makes the first amendments. Votes will then be taken on the amendments. Whilst the Committee only hears the majority of Bills at this stage the entire House hears some more controversial Bills.
Once the Committee has fully looked over the Bill and all the amendments are made the Committee reports back to the rest of the House. If the Bill was heard by the whole House in the Committee stage then this is an unnecessary step but as this is not a common occurrence the report stage is frequently used. MP can make further amendments at this stage and voting will take place on these amendments. The Terrorism Bill caused a big debate at this stage in 2005 over the proposal of a 90-day detainment of suspects without charging. MPs voted in favour of a reduction amendment to 28-days. This amended Bill eventually because the Terrorism Act 2006.
The next stage is the Third Reading where the Bill is heard in full in it’s amended form. Here MPs engage in a further debate and is then passed forward to the House of Lords for the past stages to be repeated. Sometimes, when there is a more controversial Bill, it can bounce back and forth between Houses until an agreement is made. Both the Terrorism Bill 2005 and Identity Cards Bill 2005 were bounced back and forth before a decision was made.
The final stage is the Royal Assent. This is when the Bill has successfully gone through both Houses and is put before the Queen for her assent. However in modern times she just gives her general assent, which is communicated, to the Houses by the Speaker. This is more a formality than her exercising her power.
One main advantage with Parliamentary law making is that it is democratic. This is because the country votes in the party so they have the majority seating in the House of Commons therefore can push forward any law they wish to have within the limitations. The elected party can also prevent any law they doesn’t seem to be for the benefit of the voters. This does, however, lead to a negative point that the government can vote in laws that will get them votes not necessarily for the good of the country. This is prevented by the close scrutiny that a Bill goes under before it becomes an Act especially in the House of Lords. The close scrutiny is another advantage, as it not only prevents misuse it also means that the Houses can see how and if it would work and check for any mistakes or loopholes. Parliamentary law making also allows for flexibility in what type of law is made. With Delegated Legislation and Common Law there are numerous limitation on what they can do with their law making abilities whereas Parliament have less limitations. The House of Commons and House of Lords contain many people of different backgrounds with different opinions therefore the any Bill will be well thought out, fair and exposed to many different people instead of just one.
A major disadvantage to this method of law making is its slowness. It can take months to years for a Bill to become an Act, usually the more controversial the Bill the longer it will take, which is a bad thing as most controversial Bills are usually the more needed ones, for example the Euthanasia Bill has been going on for more than seventy years and is one that many people need, however this is not always the case, The Mental Capacity Act took nine years to go through. The time can also mean that by the time the Bill has passed into an Act the Act may be slightly outdated in both technology and wording. As it takes so long to make Bills changing them can also be a problem as a lot of Acts are quite old so the language is more complex and open to misinterpretation. Similarly some Acts wording can be quite basic which leaves more room for misinterpretation. Some Bills may also be democratic as some can start in the House of Lords, where the elected body do not have power.
