Legislative Process HoC V HoL Flashcards
What happens before a bill enters the HoC stages
Before bills are introduced they go through a consultation (Green Paper), which then may be turned into a firm proposal (White Paper), on which committees comment, before the bill is eventually drafted.
Stages of a bill
First reading - bill is introduced in one of the houses.
Second reading - more detailed examination. If majority of members vote in favour it goes to the committee stage.
Committee stage - smaller group of MPs or Lords carefully examine the bill. If the committee approves the bill it continues to the next stage, with any agreed amendments incorporated.
Report stage - takes place in the House where the bill was initially introduced. Once all amendments have been considered, and if the bill is approved, it moves on the third reading.
Third reading - final opportunity for members of the introducing house to debate the bill and make any necessary amendments. If the bill is approved during the third reading, it will proceed to the other House to undergo the same process.
Royal assent
Parliamentary ping pong
If either house makes amendments to a bill, the other House must consider them and agree to them before a bill is passed.
Bills can go back and forth between the HoL and HoC before both Houses recs agreements on the working of the bill - known as parliamentary ping pong.
Secondary legislation
Bills which turn into Acts of Parliament, are known as Primary Legislation.
These Acts empower ministers to make further changes/regulations within the scope of the law after it has become law.
These regulations are known as secondary/deregulated legislation and can be changed by ministers using ‘statutory instruments’.
Statutory instruments are scrutinised by the Select Committee on Statutory Instruments, which considers whether they should be drawn to special attention of the House.
HoC legislative scrutiny has decreased
- MPs spend a lot less time in the HoC debating legislation than they used to.
- just 27% of bills in the last 5 parliamentary sessions were subject to an oral evidence session at the committee stage, in which the committee calls in expert witnesses to give their views on the legislation.
- especially in recent years, many bills are rushed through Parliament and receive little scrutiny from the HoC, as the Brexit Process and COVID-19 set precedents for legislating quickly and avoiding scrutiny.
Exclusive power of the HoC
- Bringing down a gov - vote of no confidence
1979 Callaghan vote of no confidence - forming a confidence and supply agreements
Power to uphold a minority government through this - scrutinising and revising legislation
- delaying non-financial legislation
How the HoL has become more representative
- following New Labour’s reforms, the HoL is no longer dominated by hereditary peers, instead it is dominated by life peers who are there primarily as a result of their expertise and experience.
- following New Labour’s reforms, the HoL also no longer has an in-built Conservative majority, with the Crossbenchers ensuring no single party can get a majority. This leads to greater scrutiny than in the HoC.
How the HoL had become more professional
- since New Labour’s reforms, the HoL has become a lot more professional. Many life peers are ex professional politicians who are able to provide leadership in the HoL and have experience in parliamentary scrutiny.
- many life peers are specialists from different fields, who can provide expertise on specific areas.
- after the passing of the HRA civil liberties has become a more significant part of UK politics. As the Lords has many lawyers and human rights experts, it has seen itself as the guardian of civil liberties, shown in their 2008 opposition to Labour’s anti-terrorism legislation.
How the House of Lords has become more independent of the executive and more assertive in scrutinising the work of the government
Especially since New Labour’s reform, the HoL has become more independent of the executive.
- as peers aren’t elected, they don’t need the party machine or party funding to remain in post, therefore there is less pressure to vote along party lines, as whips have little bargaining power.
- this leads to governments being defeated a great deal more in the HoL than in the HoC, especially when the government has a massive majority, in which case the Lords becomes the effective opposition.
- the HoL has more time, energy and expertise to devote to scrutinising government policy and legislation line by line.
Power over legislation: arguments that the HoC is more powerful
- HoC can invoke Parliament Act 1949 after a year to force a bill through.
- HoL is limited in the legislation it can vote down but the commons isn’t - Salisbury convention
Can’t delay money bills under parliament acts - even when the HoL votes against legislation/attempts to significantly amend it, it often backs down when the HoC disagrees again/votes against these amendments, recognising its lack of democracy.
Power over legislation: arguments that the HoL is more powerful
- though the HoL often backs down if its amendments are rejected by the HoC, recognising its lack of legitimacy, it sometimes doesn’t and takes a stand against a bill when it feels it is justified.
- this delaying power can be very significant in influencing legislation, especially in emergencies when governments want to pass laws quickly.
- when the government has a large majority in the HoC, it is very unlikely to be defeated. By contrast, especially since New Labour’s reform, the HoL has become more independent of the executive and more assertive in scrutinising the work of the government. This leads to the gov being defeated a great deal more in the hoc than the HoL.
Scrutiny of the government: arguments that the HoL is more powerful than
- especially in recent years, when the government has increasingly rushed legislation through the HoC, the HoL has played a crucial role in the scrutinising and revising legislation, as the government has less control over the parliamentary timetable in the Lords.
- since New Labour’s reforms, the HoL has also become a lot more professional and has significant expertise, which allows highly effective scrutiny of government legislation.
- the HoC spends little time scrutinising government legislation, whilst the fact that MPs are whipped and public bill committees reflect the balance of the house, and therefore have a government majority, limit the effectiveness of the HoC scrutiny.
Scrutiny of the government: arguments that the HoC is more powerful
- the HoC can also be seen as providing effective non-legislation scrutiny in a number of ways, including select committees, ministers’ questions and debates.
- the democratic legitimacy of the HoC legislative scrutiny leads to it being more effective, whilst it also has the exclusive power to vote down financial legislation and legislation included in the government’s manifesto.
- Public Bill Committees in the HoC do provide effective scrutiny.
Key Non-legislative powers of both chambers: arguments HoC is more powerful
- a key power held exclusively by the HoC is that they can hold a vote of no confidence and therefore bring down a government if the government loses.
- the HoC also has the exclusive power to uphold a minority governement through a confidence and supply agreement.
Key Non-legislative powers of both chambers: arguments that the HoL is more powerful
- if the government seeks to stay on beyond 5 years without a general election, then the HoL has the legal power to force a general election.
