What is a Private Members' Bill?

Publications / Guides

What is a Private Members' Bill?

13 Dec 2019

Selection of Private Members' Bills in 2017. (©@HouseofCommons)

Private Members' Bills (PMBs) are bills introduced by MPs and Peers who are not government ministers. They provide backbenchers with an opportunity to address public concerns and to set a policy agenda that is not determined by the executive. But the procedures, often a source of controversy, are different to those that apply for government bills.

Last updated: 4 May 2022

Guides / What is a Ballot Bill?

At the start of a new parliamentary Session backbench MPs can enter the PMB ballot. The 20 MPs whose names are drawn may introduce a Bill of their choice. Ballot Bills have the best chance of becoming law because they have priority over other PMBs when time is allocated for debates.

Guides / What is a Ten Minute Rule Bill?

Ten Minute Rule Bills are essentially policy aims put into legislative language in order to secure a 10-minute speaking slot during 'primetime' in the House of Commons Chamber after Question Time on Tuesdays and Wednesdays (but not on Budget day).

Guides / What is a Presentation Bill?

Any MP is permitted under Standing Order No. 57 to introduce a bill of his or her choice, having given prior notice to the Public Bill Office. Presentation Bills can be formally 'presented' at any sitting, but only once all the Ballot Bills have been presented.

There are three types of Private Members' Bill (PMB), distinguished in terms of when and how they are introduced, and how they secure time to be debated:

a Ballot Bill;
a Ten Minute Rule Bill; and
a Presentation Bill.

Thirteen Friday sittings (approximately 65 hours) are set aside in the House of Commons each Session for consideration of PMBs. Priority for the use of the first seven sitting Fridays is given to Ballot Bills. These thus have the best chance of becoming law, or of at least being debated in the Chamber. These are the best known form of Private Members' Bill.

In contrast, there is no fixed time for consideration of PMBs in the House of Lords and once all the Ballot Bills have been introduced, a PMB can be introduced by a Peer on any sitting day.

Guides / Why are Private Members' Bills debated on a Friday?

Thirteen Friday sittings are set aside in the House of Commons each Session for consideration of PMBs, signifying a commitment to provide some freedom from the normal constraint that 'Government business shall have precedence at every sitting' (Standing Order No.14(8)). Unless the House decides otherwise, these are the only Friday sittings held each Session. Last updated: 4 May 2022

Guides / Private Members' Bills: What are the legislative stages in the House of Commons?

PMBs in the Commons go through the same legislative stages as Government bills, but the procedures that apply at each stage are different. The lack of programming and absence of time limits on speeches facilitate filibustering rather than effective debate and scrutiny. And low yet complex procedural and voting thresholds enable even limited opposition to thwart popular bills. Updated: 4 May 2022

Guides / Private Members' Bills: What are the legislative stages in the House of Lords?

At the start of each new parliamentary Session, a PMB ballot is held in the House of Lords. This ballot determines the order in which PMBs will receive their First Reading and on what days. Once all the Ballot Bills have been introduced, a Peer can introduce a PMB on any sitting day. There is no fixed time for consideration of PMBs although generally they are considered on sitting Fridays.

Like government bills, PMBs must pass through both Houses of Parliament if they are to become law. A PMB that is introduced in the House of Commons and survives all its Commons stages there must therefore be adopted by a backbench Peer who is willing to steer it through the House of Lords. Conversely, PMBs can also originate in the House of Lords but must be adopted by a backbench MP if they are to progress through the House of Commons.

The primary purpose of a PMB cannot be to create a new tax or increase government spending; these are permitted only as secondary effects. And a PMB cannot be used to duplicate a decision that has already been made by the House of Commons earlier in the Session.

As with government bills, a PMB must be compatible with the Human Rights Act 1998, and the Joint Committee on Human Rights may investigate if it has concerns.

If a PMB involves a matter that is devolved to Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland then the relevant devolved legislature(s) may need to pass a Legislative Consent Motion.

If a PMB might affect the interests of Her Majesty the Queen or the Prince of Wales then their consent may also be needed.

Cite this

Hansard Society (2022), Guide to Private Members' Bills, (Hansard Society: London)

Latest / Highlights

News / The day the King marched on Parliament: King Charles I, five MPs and the road to civil war - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 102

In this episode we speak with historian Jonathan Healey about one of the most extraordinary days in parliamentary history when King Charles I entered the Commons Chamber with soldiers aiming to arrest five MPs. This dramatic moment, vividly recounted in Healey’s new book The Blood in Winter, marked a crucial turning point toward civil war. We explore the power struggles, propaganda, and the geography that shaped the fate of a nation and the Westminster Parliament. Please help us by completing our Listener Survey. It will only take a few minutes.

News / Parliament gagged by super-injunction? A conversation with Joshua Rozenberg - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 101

Legal expert Joshua Rozenberg joins us this week to unpack the legal and constitutional ramifications of one of the most troubling intersections of government secrecy, national security, and parliamentary accountability in recent memory. Thousands of Afghans who had worked with British forces were placed at risk of Taliban revenge attacks after a catastrophic government data leak in 2022 exposed their details. In response, ministers secured a “super-injunction” – so secret that even its existence could not be reported – effectively silencing public debate and preventing parliamentary scrutiny for almost two years. The breach, only revealed this week, led to a covert resettlement scheme which has already cost taxpayers millions of pounds. Please help us by completing our Listener Survey. It will only take a few minutes.

News / One year on: How is Parliament performing? - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 100

In our 100th episode, we take stock of Parliament one year after the 2024 general election. With a fractured opposition, a dominant Labour government, and a House of Commons still governed by rules designed for a two-party system, how well is this new Parliament really functioning? Please help us by completing our Listener Survey. It will only take a few minutes.

News / Labour's welfare meltdown - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 99

It’s been a bruising week for the Government, as a Labour backbench revolt forced ministers to gut their own welfare reforms live in the House of Commons. We explore why Sir Keir Starmer appears to have such a poor grip on parliamentary management. Plus, House of Lords reform expert Professor Meg Russell explains why the hereditary peers bill may be a once-in-a-generation chance to tackle deeper issues — like curbing prime ministerial patronage and reducing the bloated size of the upper chamber. And in Dorking, faith and politics collide over assisted dying. Please help us by completing our Listener Survey. It will only take a few minutes.

Submissions / Parliamentary scrutiny of treaties - Our evidence to the House of Lords International Agreements Committee

Our evidence on treaty scrutiny has been published by the House of Lords International Agreements Committee. Our submission outlines the problems with the existing framework for treaty scrutiny and why legislative and cultural change are needed to improve Parliament's scrutiny role. Our evidence joins calls for a parliamentary consent vote for the most significant agreements, a stronger role for Parliament in shaping negotiating mandates and monitoring progress, and a sifting committee tasked with determining which agreements warrant the greatest scrutiny.