Select Committee on Modernisation of the House of Commons First Report


Reporting the bill to the House


88. The outcome of the standing committee stage of a bill is a new copy of the bill, as amended in committee. Amendments are not shown in the reprinted bill, so the only way to see what amendments have been made is to trawl back through the standing committee Hansard or Minutes of Proceedings, a task which is difficult enough in itself and can be further frustrated by the fact that clause, page and line numbers often change significantly in committee, so it can be difficult to see to which part of the new bill a committee stage amendment relates. This is in contrast to some other countries, such as New Zealand, where committees considering and amending legislation are also able to produce a substantive report explaining what they have done to the bill and why.[94] Below we consider two issues: the possibility of a substantive, descriptive report which provides a synopsis of the main changes made to the bill; and the possibility of a new format for bills re-printed as amended in committee, which would show every amendment made to the text.

A substantive report from the committee

89. David Kidney MP suggested to us that standing committees should be able to produce a substantive report of this kind. Such a report could include a summary of the main amendments made to the bill, a list of the parts of the bill which were not debated in committee (either through lack of time or lack of interest) and identify any areas where the Minister gave an undertaking to re-consider his or her position before report stage.[95] A report of this kind could clearly be very useful to the House when it came to report stage, as well as to outside observers following the progress of the legislation. However, for the committee to agree a report of this kind would require at least one deliberative meeting, eating into time which would otherwise have been available to debate the bill itself. It could also potentially lead to attempts to re-open debate on some of the issues arising from the bill. An alternative would be for the standing committee report to be a formality, prepared by the clerk and agreed to on the nod, but in that case there is little point in it having the committee's imprimatur.

90. Research by a Library Working Group on legislation briefings found evidence of some demand for updated briefings on bills, and noted that material produced for second readings could quickly become out of date.[96] What is required is a straightforward, dispassionate account of the committee stage, describing:

a)  the main ways in which the bill was amended (though it should not be necessary to identify every last minor, technical or drafting change);

b)  any significant areas of debate which did not lead to the bill being amended, for example, on groups of backbench or opposition amendments that were withdrawn or negatived or on clause stand part;

c)  the parts of the bill which were not debated, with an indication of whether this was due to the effects of the programme order or whether the issues raised were adequately covered by debates on other parts of the bill; and

d)  any areas where the Minster gave an undertaking to reconsider or to bring forward more amendments at report stage or in the Lords.

The House of Commons Library produces a Research Paper on each bill before the second reading debate, and is already planning to produce follow-up briefing papers on selected bills, such as those which have been heavily amended.[97] We believe that a report of the committee stage could best be undertaken by them. We recommend that the Library produce a report of the standing committee stage of most Government bills, and those private Members' bills which have a reasonable prospect of being passed, in time to inform debate at the report stage.

Showing the amendments made to the bill

91. It can also be very difficult to see exactly what amendments have been made to a bill in standing committee. A report on the standing committee stage of the kind recommended above would be helpful in describing how the bill has changed, Members and others sometimes also need to know exactly what amendments have been made. Anybody wishing to do so would need to sit down with a copy of the pre-committee bill and the Standing Committee Proceedings,[98] look at which amendments were made and where they occurred and reads across to the copy of the bill as amended in committee.

92. There is a strong case for showing the amendments in the reprinted version of the bill. A simple system is needed, for example, showing deleted words struck through and inserted words in bold. There are a number of technical considerations to be taken into account including whether or not such a document could be generated wholly or substantially automatically and whether any additional printing costs would be likely to be incurred. We recommend that the House undertake a feasibility study of showing the amendments made to bills amended in committee. It might be possible to do this by means of an on-line version of the bill.


94   This is true of the select committee stage of bills in New Zealand, which takes place between first and second reading. The New Zealand Parliament is unicameral and much smaller than either House of the UK Parliament, with 121 Members. Back

95   Ev 1. Back

96   Report of the House of Commons Library Legislation Briefings Group, 30 March 2006 (not published). Back

97   IbidBack

98   Also known as the 'funny minute', this is a re-print of the amendment paper with the fate of each amendment-agreed to, negatived, withdrawn or not moved-recorded next to it. Back


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2006
Prepared 7 September 2006