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? 14-18 July 2025

MPs will consider a rare privilege motion relating to a request from the Omagh Bombing inquiry, while the Conservatives will choose the topic for Tuesday’s Opposition Day debate. Select Committees will question Cabinet Ministers on welfare reform, the NHS Plan, foreign policy, national security, and policy announcements made first to the media rather than Parliament. The Deprivation of Citizenship Orders Bill will complete its Commons stages. Peers will scrutinise bills on renters’ rights, employment, and planning. MPs will debate Statutory Instruments on media mergers, murder sentencing, and energy costs, and will vote on extending interest registration rules for MPs’ staff. Backbench MPs will lead debates on giving every child the best start in life, the Global Plastics Treaty and end of life care. The House of Lords will debate the Strategic Defence Review. → We value your thoughts. Please click here to let us know what you think of the Parliament Matters Bulletin in our reader survey.

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.

News / What Westminster gets wrong about the NHS - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 98

We are joined this week by two guests who bring invaluable insight into the intersection of health policy and parliamentary life. Dr. Sarah Wollaston and Steve Brine – both former MPs, health policy experts, and co-hosts of the podcast Prevention is the New Cure – share their experiences of how the House of Commons handles health and social care. 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.

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

Guides / What is a Private Members' Bill?