Last chance for bills on Fridays, says Committee

18 April 2016

Parliamentary and public confidence in sitting Fridays is waning, and without reform we might have no more backbench legislation, warns the Procedure Committee in its report on private Members' bills.

The Committee has reviewed House procedure and practice on private Members' bills, in the light of the experience in this Session and the recommendations of the Committee in the last Parliament.

Present process

The Committee finds that the present process fails on two counts: it is misleading to the general public, often falsely raising expectations about legislative action, and its procedures are too easily gamed to prevent genuine legislative proposals from proceeding. Members of the public who observe a bill they care about being 'talked out' are entitled to feel bemused and angry over the use of procedural devices to prevent the House taking a decision on legislation.

Jacob Rees-Mogg, a Committee member in the last Parliament, admitted that he rather enjoyed talking at length to block bills, but "it doesn't make Parliament look great. I think that is a problem which it is in everybody's interest to solve."

Priority bills

The solution the Committee offers is a change in the way bills are prioritised. It suggests that at the start of each session the Backbench Business Committee should choose up to four bills to receive priority, based on their merits, the levels of cross-party support for them and the preparation and prior scrutiny they have received.

There would still be a ballot, but it would be for a smaller number of MPs to introduce the remainder of the bills, up to a total of 14. Fewer priority bills increases the likelihood that these bills will receive better scrutiny and debate, and encourages better preparation of the bills to be introduced.

Standing Orders

The Committee also demands a change to Standing Orders to guarantee a vote on second reading on the first seven bills of a session. This change will give the Speaker authority to impose time limits on speeches if necessary.

The Committee recommends some administrative changes aimed at ensuring that the Order Paper reflects only genuine bills which the sponsoring Member wishes to pass into legislation.

The Committee makes no recommendations about the scheduling of private Members bills in the Parliamentary calendar, but warns that moving consideration of bills away from Fridays may affect the chances they have of becoming law.

Chair's comment

Mr Charles Walker MP, Chair, said:

"The private Members' bills process is, at its worst, a fraud on the people we represent. Procedures on sitting Fridays are often used to frustrate worthy proposals, and an increasing number of MPs feel they cannot commit to attending the House to support measures which have no chance of success.

We are advocating changes which will lead to well-prepared and well supported bills coming to the House for priority consideration. Our aim is to engage our colleagues to fill the Friday vacuum—now largely dominated by procedural games—with measured debate and proper scrutiny.

We also want to introduce a guaranteed vote on second reading debates on bills which have been given priority for consideration. This will allow the Speaker to impose time limits on those debates, if necessary, thereby ending the practice of 'talking out' bills which so many find distasteful.

In its present form I cannot see much of a future for private Members' Fridays. Without reform, it seems inevitable that the process will become increasingly irrelevant and ineffective, and that backbench legislative opportunities, as we know them, will become a thing of the past. That would only increase the grip of the executive over the legislature."

Previous private Members' bills reports

Reports of the Committee on this subject in the last Parliament are available as follows: