You can put this down as an open discussion thread on the general theme of ‘we do the research so you don’t have to‘.
Check below the fold and you’ll find, listed in ballot order, a quick but complete run down of the twenty private members’ bills that will be attempting to wend their way through parliament over the next few months.
The information you’re getting here consists of:
1. The title of each bill, and its main sponsor.
2. Description of each bill as it appears on order papers, and
3. Short paragraphs on what might be in bill, whether it has legs to make it into law and/or whether it might spawn some interesting debate.
As usual, there’s a mixed bag of legislation. A few bills that look pretty mundane and uncontroversial, several with the potential to kick off a decent debate or two, one or two that may throw up some unexpected banana skins for certain parties and a couple that are stone-cold attempts to shaft political opponents.
LC contributors are, of course, encouraged to pick up on anything that interest them and delve a little deeper, as Sunny’s already done in flagging up the proposal to extend employment rights to temps and agency workers, otherwise feel free to use the comments under this post to talk amongst yourselves and pick over anything on the list that interests you.
And so, without further ado, its on to the meat…
1) Planning and Energy Bill – 2007-08: Mr Michael Fallon (Con)
A Bill to enable local planning authorities to set requirements for energy generation and energy efficiency in local plans
The wording – set requirements – suggests more planning regulations which could prove problematic with some in his own party, who will look at this in terms of increased costs to business. It sounds a lot like the kind of Bill that the late Eric Forth specialised in filibustering, just because he could, and may prove an interesting test of the commitment in Tory ranks to Cameron’s green agenda. Unlikely to go the distance.
2) Special Educational Needs (Information) Bill – 2007-08: Mrs Sharon Hodgson (Lab)
A Bill to amend the Education Act 1996 in relation to the provision and publication of information about children who have special educational needs; and for connected purposes
Not one that can be assessed until the Bill is published and we can see what kind of information were dealing with here and where and how it’s to be provided/published. Stands a decent chance if it’s all pretty benign but will run into problems if it isn’t given current public edginess over government data handling.
3) Temporary and Agency Workers (Equal Treatment) Bill – 2007-08: Andrew Miller (Lab)
A Bill to provide for the protection of temporary and agency workers; to require the principle of equal treatment to be applied to temporary and agency workers; to make provision about the enforcement of rights of temporary and agency workers; and for connected purposes
This will be hotly contested, as any legislation extending employment rights invariably is, and looks another good candidate for a death by filibuster from with Tory ranks.
4) British Board of Film Classification (Accountability to Parliament and Appeals) Bill – 2007-08: Mr Julian Brazier (Con)
A Bill to make provision for parliamentary scrutiny of senior appointments to the British Board of Film Classification and of guidelines produced by it; to establish a body with powers to hear appeals against the release of videos and DVDs and the classification of works in prescribed circumstances; to make provision about penalties for the distribution of illegal works; and for connected purposes
Expect Mediawatch, Christian Voice and assorted other self-appointed guardians of public morality to be backing this one, which is all about creating frameworks for censorship. Can’t see this making the statute books and its one that any self-respecting liberal or libertarian should be opposing all the way.
5) Private Equity (Transfer of Undertakings and Protection of Employment) Bill – 2007-08: Mr John Heppell (Lab)
A Bill to extend the application of the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 to the acquisition and disposal of substantial shareholdings by private equity companies; and for connected purposes
Another extension of employment protection means another hotly contested Bill and another shot at talking a Bill out by the Tory backbenches. Not entirely sure of the technicalities of this one or precisely what the issue is with Private Equity and TUPE, so its not a bad one to be debating in general terms but unlikely to go through as a private members’ Bill.
6) Animals Act 1971 (Amendment) Bill – 2007-08: Mr Stephen Crabb (Con)
A Bill to amend the Animals Act 1971 to limit strict liability for damage done by animals
Having looked it up it appears that the 1971 act applies a strict liability for damage caused by livestock, dogs and non-native wild animals on the owner of the animal(s) causing the damage, which the bill will seek to limit. To what extent and in whose favour – although the target beneficiaries are most likely to be farmers – is something that can only be assessed when the text of the Bill is published.
Success or failure may hinge on whether the Bill is perceived to be carrying any hidden agendas.
7) Food Products (Marketing to Children) Bill – 2007-08: Nigel Griffiths (Lab)
A Bill to make provision about the advertising, marketing and promotion of food and drink products to children; and for connected purposes
The most likely pitch for this will be around combating obesity by limiting promotion of unhealthy foods to kids although there is a chance it may seek, instead, to sort out some anomalies in existing regulations where the literal application of current rules has had the unintended consequence of placing restrictions on the advertising of things like milk and marmite.
Reaction to this Bill will hinge on exactly what it’s seeking to achieve.
Environmental Protection (Transfers at Sea) Bill – 2007-08: Mark Lazarowicz (Lab)
A Bill to make provision about provision about transfers of cargo at sea; to provide for environmental safeguards in relation to such transfers; and for connected purposes
May be relatively uncontroversial unless it runs headlong into concerns about too much regulation and the impact on shipping costs. Pitched right it should stand a good chance of going all the way.
9) Health and Safety (Offences) Bill – 2007-08: Keith Hill (Lab)
A Bill to revise the mode of trial and maximum penalties application to certain offences relating to health and safety
Keith Hill’s union background is with the RMT (National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers) which means we can expect the bill to major on things like corporate liability and seek to stiffen the health and safety regime around transport. Unless it gets major government backing, expect this one to be talked out by the Tories.
10) Energy Saving (Daylight) Bill – 2007-08: Mr Tim Yeo (Con)
A Bill to advance time by one hour throughout the year to create lighter evenings, for an experimental period; and for connected purposes
This is one of those neither here nor there Bills that will hinge entirely on whether Yeo can put up a sufficiently persuasive argument or not.
11) Voting Age (Reduction) Bill – 2007-08: Julie Morgan (Lab)
A Bill to reduce the voting age for parliamentary and other elections to 16 years
With a government sponsored constitutional reform package on the near horizon, it’s doubtful that this Bill will make it into law and its sponsor may be asked to withdraw it after the debate stages in anticipation of it being included in an official government reform package. Not much chance of becoming law but a useful enough exercise in framing the debate and gauging levels of support.
12) Fixed Term Parliament Bill – 2007-08: David Howarth (LD)
A Bill to fix the date of the next general election and all subsequent elections; to allow the House of Commons to change the day of the week on which a general election is held; and for connected purposes
Not a hope in hell of making it into law. Will get support from Tory ranks in the hope of keeping the government’s embarrassment over the election that wasn’t in the public eye but Labour’s majority and control of the parliamentary timetable will kill it – the only questions are how quickly and how quietly.
At this stage, fixed term parliaments might sound good on paper but would prove a nightmare under current constitutional conditions due to the lack of separation between the executive and legislature. Any move to fixed terms has to provide answers to questions such as what happens if a government loses its majority in mid-term due to a by-election or loses a confidence vote.
13) Forces Widows’ Pensions (Equality of Treatment) Bill – 2007-08: Mr Michael Mates (Con)
A Bill to provide for the equal treatment of Forces widows’ pensions in respect of retirement from military service for the periods before 1973 and between 1973 and 2005; and for connected purposes
On paper this sounds a very reasonable proposition. Quite how the MoD and Treasury will react to it will depend on what the cost implications are and how this would impact on budgets. If costs are relatively low it could make it into law, if not it is likely to hit problems.
In the current climate this could be a real banana skin for the government as the general proposition of equal treatment in pension rights for Forces Widows is a tough one to oppose without looking mean-spirited and unsupportive of the military.
14) Leasehold Reform Bill – 2007-08: Simon Hughes (LD)
A Bill to amend the law relating to long leaseholders; to confer further powers on leaseholders; to make provision in relation to leaseholders in local council owned property and property owned by other social landlords; to confer powers on landlords to create sinking funds; to make requirements of landlords relating to the management of property; for connected purposes
Your guess is as good as mine as to how this might play.
This is the kind of Bill that can’t be assessed without seeing the wording in full and also the kind of thing that would typically be dealt with on the basis of recommendations derived from a Law Society review of existing law and regulations. The text, thus far, implies a shifting in the balance of rights toward leaseholders and away from landlords, which could see it run in problems unless it can be sold as providing for greater fairness in a system that’s currently unfairly loaded in the favour of landlords.
15) Borough Freedom Bill – 2007-08: Derek Conway (Con)
A Bill to enable rights of admission to the freedom of cities or towns to be extended to women; to enable other amendments relating to admission to be made; to confer powers to admit persons as honorary freemen of certain places in the Confederation of the Cinque Ports; and for connected purposes
Can’t see anything controversial or problematic in this Bill, which should attract cross party support.
Looks to stand a very good chance of making it on to the statute books.
16) Sound Recordings (Copyright Term Extension) Bill – 2007-08: Pete Wishart (SNP)
A Bill to extend beyond 50 years the copyright term of sound recordings; and for connected purposes
Oh good, the Cliff Richard Pension Fund Enhancement Bill.
Seriously, this will spawn a fair bit of debate, as any attempts to extend copyright terms invariably do, but in terms of its chances of becoming law, it’s another Bill that will have to rely on no one being motivated enough to take a crack at talking it out.
17) Environment Protection (Airports) Bill – 2007-08: Justine Greening (Con)
A Bill to promote the protection of the environment near airports; to establish a body to monitor the environmental impact of airports and to report levels of pollution; to confer certain powers on that body; and for connected purposes
Another Tory sponsored ‘green’ bill that promises more regulation and a brand new Quango to go with it! John Redwood must be spinning in his shuttle pod!
Seriously, this Bill is going nowhere near the statute books but should generate a fair old scrap in the Commons, with the Tories trying to make Labour look hypocritical on climate change and air travel and Labour seeking to exploit the obvious bureaucratic components of the Bill as a means of promoting a bit of in-fighting between the Cameroons and the free-market hardliners.
18) Public Sector Buildings (Energy Performance) Bill – 2007-08: Anne Snelgrove (Lab)
A Bill to make further provision about energy efficiency and micro generation in public sector buildings; and for connected purposes
Sounds fairly benign on paper and may stand a good chance unless there are cost implications that the Treasury don’t like the look of. To be honest, I’m not sure whether this needs legislation at all, unless here are some minor planning issues that need tweaking, as it looks to be the kind of thing that could easily be handled as matters of policy through the DCLG with a bit of fiscal string-pulling by the Treasury.
19) Foreign Nationals (Statistics) Bill – 2007-08: Mr William Cash (Con)
A Bill to establish a requirement on local authorities to transfer certain statistics relating to nationality to the Office of National Statistics; and for connected purposes
With Frank Field’s name on the list of supporters this is all tied in to the question of migration and the costs facing some local authorities due to the impact of problems with current ONS population predictions and the effect this has on their central government grants. Whether it passes into law will depend on exactly what the full agenda is.
20) Disqualification from Parliament (Taxation Status) Bill – 2007-08: Mr Gordon Prentice (Lab)
A Bill to make provision for disqualification from membership of the House of Commons and the House of Lords on grounds relating to residence and domicile for taxation purposes; and for connected purposes
Ah yes, it’s the smoke out Michael Ashcroft Bill.
This one is simple enough to call. If Ashcroft is clean and then the options the Tories have are straightforward. They can give Lord Laidlaw, their one verifiable non-domiciled major donor, the choice of relocating to the UK or being cut loose by the party – and let the Bill pass – or they can filibuster the Bill and take the flak and mudslinging that Labour and Lib Dems will be throwing at them and hope it doesn’t cause too much damage.
This one has ‘concocted in the Labour Whip’s Office’ written all over it and should provide a good dirty fight.
And in the words of the wise and sagacious Porky Pig, ‘Th-th-th-th-that’s all folks’.
| Post to del.icio.us |
Only the top two or three Private Members’ Bills have any realistic chance of reaching the Statue Book. All the rest are merely advertisements [and sometimes a way of showing your constituents that you are doing something].
A pity Tim Yeo didn’t get a higher place for his effort to rationalise daylight saving. While his solution may not be the best one, it’s high time the absurd and costly ritual of altering the clocks twice a year, with its accompaniment of long dark winter evenings and widespread depression [now dignified as SAD syndrome], was done away with.
How about proposing the subject of a Private Member’s Bill you would introduce if you won the ballot? Mine would be to prohibit political parties from accepting donations from anyone who was not a registered party member.
Good work Unity- nice little item. Some of the details of all of these will be interesting to see.
>>Only the top two or three Private Members’ Bills have any realistic chance of reaching the Statue Book.
Not necessarily.
Bills lower down the list can often make it if they can attract the right kind of support – which generally means getting the Leader of the House and the Whips onside – or where they’re straightforward enough to pass on the nod from the main parties.
Thanks – really helpful. The SEN Bill has the support of Blunkett and, more significantly, John Bercow who has cross-party admiration for his work on special needs in schools. I believe its underlying aim is to monitor how well SEN provision is made by schools. There are a lot of problems with schools that don’t actually provide the support specified in statements of special needs, instead using the funding for other purposes. Around three-quarters of school exclusions are of children with SENs, and the evidence is mounting that many were not getting the support they were entitled to.
Another problem: LEAs are responsible both for assessment and funding, with evidence that children are not being statemented because the LEA is then under a duty to provide the funds. It will be interesting to see how the Bill proposes to address all this – preferably without compromising the privacy and dignity of the children themselves.
Good stuff Unity!
The bills to reduce voting age and for fixed term parliaments look interesting too.
You say the bill for Fixed Term Parliaments has no hope in hell. That’s a shame because I like it on face value.
At this stage, fixed term parliaments might sound good on paper but would prove a nightmare under current constitutional conditions due to the lack of separation between the executive and legislature. Any move to fixed terms has to provide answers to questions such as what happens if a government loses its majority in mid-term due to a by-election or loses a confidence vote.
I think Anthony Barnett from OurKingdom is well placed to answer this…
On other stuff, I’ve been reading a profile of Mike Huckabee in the New York Times.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/06/us/politics/06huckabee.html
I think this guy is the one who will eventually make the nomination. Mitt Romney is officially on his way out (on my list).
On Yeo’s bill,
This is one of those neither here nor there Bills
I’m not sure about that. Has anyone calculated what would be the likely benefits in reduced carbon emissions of more evening daylight in winter? They could be significant – certainly more than a couple of pence on petrol every 12 months.
Further to DonaldS’s point, Yeo’s bill would reduce the number of road deaths (the reduction in the evening would be greater than the increase in the morning). I rather hope it gets through; it’s a sensible idea.
9. Are there studies that suggest this is the case, not to say you’re wrong just interested in a tangible link on the subject from a reputable source. I can’t seem to find any arguments against not bringing the clocks back from BST though.
We do seem to have the same argument every year though, specifically in respect to Scotland, and much of it centred around business. I fully respect that some businesses don’t have much choice about when they operate (because of needing to perhaps be logistically in time with those on the continent)…but surely it is easier to benefit everyone by businesses being the ones that change their operating times rather than everyone else changing their clocks for every appliance and time keeping device they have?
I mean, put us in a perpetual state of BST, but rather than schools starting at 9am start them at 10am..same goes for farmers and similar that complain about the lightness of the day…they can return these hours to what is currently practiced during the traditional BST period to take advantage of the earlier daylight. Is there any credibility in this as an idea? Surely, to my mind, there is little to lose by doing so…especially when doing so would actually put British workers on the same hours as those in the majority of Europe.
I don’t know, interesting subject though!
That bill on the BBFC is a disgrace – hey, let’s take the body that already censors more films in the Western world than any other except maybe Germany and give various nutjobs the opportunity to put their case for whichever film offends them to be banned. The very point of the setting up/reform of the BBFC after the video nasties idiocy was that it was independent of government – Mr Brazier wants to turn it into a state censor.
Do we really want fixed-term parliaments? I used to think so, but watching the USA where constant electioneering kicks in immediately after each presidential and mid-term election, I’m not so sure now.
11. Aye, I’m sure you’ve all heard of the Manhunt 2 debacle. Dislike or love the idea of that computer game as much as you like, since when is it acceptable for a body like the BBFC to tell reasonable adults that they cannot own such a game widely accepted as being no worse in terms of visceral gore than films like “Saw”? That’s another debate though I guess.
12. the opposite question has to be, do we want the government to be able to so easily manufacture their own re-election. Perhaps an alternative to fixed term parliaments are (with allowances) great advanced notice of the specific time frame in which an election will take place?
Hmmm that voting age reduction certainly is interesting…
Donald/Dave:
On Yeo’s bill, the ‘neither here nor there’ comment is meant only in the sense that it looks to have no particular party political content and should rest on how good a factual case Yeo can put up.
Septicisle:
Precisely. The list of supporters makes interesting reading – Gummer, Vaz, Widdie, Stephen Pound, Dorries… its a god squad bill all over.
Well, Vaz has made video games into his personal crusade. All he ever does is go on about how video games are destroying our society.
Sunny:
So there’s no point suggesting to Vaz that we settle this over a Quake deathmatch then?
interesting to note that the effect of the BBFC has now been felt quite clearly in the wake of their manhunt 2 ruling, with a new game “No More Heroes” being released in europe with self imposed censorship. It’s very sad for the industry given that all the positive things the American games industry bods have been saying about the lack of offense despite the high “violence” content, but surely situations such as this where the BBFC has clearly scared some producers into dumbing down their own product before it even reached the censorship board mean that it can hardly be seen as ineffectual by the “God squad”?
But then I suppose there’s rarely a time when they don’t wish control the morals of this country regardless of the evidence either way.
@ Unity – Sorry, I misunderstood. I still think it’s a good bill.
@ Lee Griffin – yes, have a look at the links at the bottom of this page: http://www.timyeo.org.uk/record.jsp?type=article&ID=37
12, 13: PM-decided election times give an unfair advantage in that the PM can call an election when se has particularly good approval ratings. On the other hand, a generally-liked PM could be turfed out prematurely in a fixed term cycle just because hir approval happens to be particularly low at election time.
Perhaps the solution really is to sample the public mood more frequently, by electing 1/5th of parliament every year or so.
19. I had a bit of a look around myself when I had more time, the review “Time for change” published a few years back is a very good resource for the pro’s of the debate, and given farmers are now no longer against such moves…and given that there has to be a case for the lowering of our emissions it would seem that the only hurdle to such a bill…if presented correctly…would be the sensitive issue of how Scotland deals with the changes.
Some very welcome news: the Video Appeals Committee has found against the BBFC on Manhunt 2, by 4 to 3. http://www.bbfc.co.uk/news/press/20071210a.html The BBFC says it’s considering its position: http://www.bbfc.co.uk/news/press/20071210b.html
I would of thought it will almost certainly have to now let it through at 18, which it should have done in the first place rather than kow-towing to the Mail and others. It’s ludicrous that films such as Saw and the others in the “torture-porn” genre are let through uncut when Manhunt, which by all accounts isn’t even a very-good game was banned.
I am in the “why do we have to change clocks” camp too, but on the other side to most of the people here, it seems. Am I the only person in the universe who doesn’t like BST? I hate light evenings. I like it to be light during the day and dark at night. Also: the whole rest of the world sets their clocks by GMT +/- something: are we really going to abandon that?
[/grumpy Northerner]
That said: “the Cliff Richard Pension Fund Enhancement Bill” LMAO!
23. It’s a fair and valid point and one that the bill has to contend with most if it wants to pass. But really it is our perceptions of “evening” that have to change. If your evening starts at 6pm and you prefer it to be dark by that time then surely such timings are based on the fact you get home from work between 5 and 6pm? If you got home from work at 6-7pm after starting work an hour later in terms of time (but not in terms of day light) then would there be any difference to you other than potentially a more adequate lifestyle?
Also I feel the consequence of this bill is pretty irrelevant as to the fate of the GMT, or rather than GMT is pretty irrelevant to a conversation about saving money, climate, economies and lives.
22. Quite, Rob Zombies “Halloween” is widely regarded as a torture-porn masterpiece that is by and large the worst “horror” movie ever made. That made it to these shores perfectly fine. I’m glad to see that the appeal won against the BBFC, it’s one for common sense and personal liberties.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
| 8 Comments 18 Comments 15 Comments 20 Comments 9 Comments 26 Comments 57 Comments 67 Comments 2 Comments 49 Comments | LATEST COMMENTS » steveb posted on Against multiculturalism » 5cc posted on Against multiculturalism » Lee Griffin posted on Against multiculturalism » Lee Griffin posted on Vote Pirate Party » Just Visiting posted on Against multiculturalism » Lee Griffin posted on Against multiculturalism » Richard Blogger posted on Vote Pirate Party » Lee Griffin posted on Against multiculturalism » Richard Lawson posted on Vote Pirate Party » Just Visiting posted on Against multiculturalism » Just Visiting posted on Against multiculturalism » crusade posted on Against multiculturalism » AllanBP posted on Against multiculturalism » steveb posted on Against multiculturalism » Just Visiting posted on Against multiculturalism Last 50 // Comments feed |