How should Private Members' Bills in the House of Commons be reformed?

Publications / Reports

Enhancing the role of backbench MPs: Proposals for reform of Private Members' Bills

4 Apr 2011

Carolyn Harris MP in the House of Commons Chamber, 15 December 2021. (© UK Parliament / Jessica Taylor)

Private Members’ Bills (PMBs) provide an important opportunity for backbench MPs to initiate legislative proposals and to respond to issues of public interest and concern. But in a system that enshrines the dominance of the executive a range of procedural obstacles inhibit the effectiveness of the PMB system. This report sets out how the system could be reformed.

Download the report

Read the executive summary

,
Director , Hansard Society

,
Parliamentary Specialist , Global Partners Governance

Get our latest research, insights and events delivered to your inbox

Share this and support our work

Private Members’ Bills (PMBs) should provide an important opportunity for backbench MPs to initiate legislative proposals as well as policy debate, to check the executive, and to respond to issues of public interest and concern. In recent decades, however, the number of PMBs receiving Royal Assent has largely been in decline. Executive control of the timetable has strangled many, and procedural vulnerability has thwarted others, including many that enjoyed broad parliamentary support and commanded public interest.

What procedural obstacles in the PMB system inhibit its effectiveness?

There are several key problems with the PMB system:

Friday sitting times cause difficulties in relation to the attendance of Members;
the procedural mechanisms facilitate filibustering rather than effective debate and scrutiny;
the existence of low yet complex procedural and voting thresholds enable even limited opposition to thwart popular bills; and
the resources made available to Members to develop and promote PMBs are limited.

The report's authors - Alex Brazier and Ruth Fox - with MPs Natascha Engel, Chris Bryant and Christopher Chope at the launch of the report "Enhancing the role of backbench MPs", April 2011. (© Hansard Society)

What are our proposals for reform of Private Members’ Bills?

PMB sitting times should be reformed: the key to management of PMB time should be to maximise opportunities for debate as flexibly as possible. We propose PMB time should be increased from the current 65 hours to perhaps 80 hours to be allocated by the Backbench Business Committee in, for example, any combination of the following:
- on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday evenings;
- on Wednesday mornings for up to two hours;
- on Thursday afternoons or evenings (including in Westminster Hall); and
- on Fridays (on a limited basis and for second reading only)
Each stage should be able to accumulate over more than one sitting if required, as is the case with government bills, in order to maximise use of time and build flexibility into the system.
Timetabling should be introduced through an automatic guillotine applied to each stage of a PMB on the floor of the House: three hours for Second Reading; three hours each for consideration of a bill reported back from a Public Bill Committee and from a Report Committee (see below); and one hour for Third Reading.
Time for consideration of PMBs should be allocated according to a fixed order of priority to eliminate the opportunity for Members to speculatively ‘game the system’ by laying down a PMB on a non-sitting day.
Carry-over motions could be applied to a small number of well-supported bills to ensure they are not lost at the end of each session.
The House should reach a settled view on the value of time limits on speeches during PMB debates.
The Public Bill Committee (PBC) stage should be reformed by removing the government’s current power to decide whether more than one PBC for PMBs should exist at any one time. Where appropriate, PBCs might also hold public-evidence hearings.
A PMB Report Committee should be established to take report stage off the floor of the House.
The resources available to help those Members who top the PMB ballot to draft their bill should be uprated (from the current £200 agreed in 1971).

Cite this

Brazier, A. & Fox, R. (2011), Enhancing the role of backbench MPs: Proposals for reform of Private Members' Bills, (Hansard Society: London)

Latest / Highlights

News / Parliament Matters Bulletin: What’s coming up in Parliament this week? 19-23 May 2025

Stella Creasy MP and Richard Tice MP will lead a backbench debate on the EU–UK summit. The Foreign Affairs Committee will hold a joint session with its Ukrainian counterpart on Russian misinformation. MPs will question the Defence Secretary, Chancellor of the Exchequer and Northern Ireland Secretary. Scrutiny of seven Government bills will continue in both Houses. Debate topics in the Commons will include an e-petition on transgender self-identification, and support for local pubs. On the Committee corridor, highlights include sessions on the security of undersea cables and the accessibility of the parliamentary estate. Michael Gove will be formally introduced to the House of Lords as its newest member.

Submissions / Status and rights of independent MPs in Parliament – Our evidence to the House of Commons Procedure Committee

Our evidence on the status and rights of independent MPs has been published by the House of Commons Procedure Committee. Our submission summarises the direct and indirect references to political parties in the Standing Orders and whether they might apply to groupings of independent MPs, analyses whether small parties and independent groupings face disadvantages, particularly in relation to committee membership, and considers whether parliamentary publications should distinguish between the many different kinds of independent MP.

Blog / The Planning and Infrastructure Bill: What happens when detail is deferred?

The Hansard Society has long raised concerns about the Government's increasing tendency to present undeveloped legislation that lacks detailed policy and grants ministers broad delegated powers to fill in the gaps later. This practice undermines effective parliamentary scrutiny, by preventing MPs and Peers from fully assessing how powers may be used, (or misused), in the future. The weak system for overseeing delegated legislation—especially in the Commons—exacerbates the problem. Several powers in the Planning and Infrastructure Bill currently before Parliament highlight these ongoing issues.

News / Assisted dying bill: Special series #12 - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 93

Is Kim Leadbeater's Assisted Dying Bill now "over the hump?" The Bill's supporters got it though its first day of Report Stage consideration in the House of Commons unscathed, with comfortable majorities in every vote. So, with debate on the most contentious set of amendments disposed of, will it now coast through its remaining scrutiny days in the Commons? Please help us by completing our Listener Survey. It will only take a few minutes.

Submissions / Evidence to the House of Commons Modernisation Committee: Priorities and strategic aims

In response to the Modernisation Committee's call for views on 17 October 2024, we submitted evidence outlining key areas we believe the Committee should prioritise. Our submission recommended a focus on: strengthening legislative scrutiny, with particular emphasis on reforming the delegated legislation system; enhancing financial scrutiny, especially in relation to the Budget and the Estimates; addressing strategic gaps in parliamentary scrutiny; making more effective use of parliamentary time; and reviewing the Standing Orders, language and rituals of the House of Commons.

Enhancing the role of backbench MPs: Proposals for reform of Private Members' Bills

Guides / What is a Private Members' Bill?