The legislative process

Green	Green paper	Contains the general proposal
Winged	White paper	More detailed proposal are set out after the initial consultations
Dragons	Draft	The proposals are drafted into a bill by government lawyers and then published
Fly	First reading	The bill is usually introduced to the House of Commons. This merely notifies the House of the bill and its subject matter. There is no debate.
Slowly	Second reading	This is the main debate on the principles of the bill, followed by a vote.
Clockwise	Committee stage	A committee between 16 and 50 MPs examines the details of the bill clause by clause and suggests amendments.
Round	Report stage	The committee reports back these amendments to the House.
The	Third Reading	This usually coincides with the report stage and marks the final debate on the bill in its amended form in the House of Commons.
Old	Other house	The bill passes to the ‘other house’ (House of Lords) for similar procedures, although in the committee stage in the lords the whole House acts as a committee.
Ruin	Royal assent	The Monarch gives approval to the bill. This is a formality and is not undertaken by the Queen personally.

Making laws: Where do they come from?

Resources to help you to research the Equality Act 2010 and the Marriage (same sex couples) bill

Equality Act 2010 
The text of the Equality Act 2010



You may be surprised as to what is included in the Equality Act.


The Citizens Advice Bureau publishes guidance as to your rights under the Equality Act, it's worth reading to ensure you know your rights and you know what to do if you think that your rights have been breached. 

 
Marriage (same sex couples) bill 

Information from Parliament about the journey from a bill to an act 

BBC Q&A on gay marriage including the arguments for and against 
Lord Tebbit argues that Gay marriage bill may lead to "lesbian queen and artificially inseminated heir"
Gay couple to sue the Church of England over their refusal to conduct same sex marriages. 

Doctrine of Parliamentary Supremacy

As a democratically elected body, parliament is the supreme law making body in the UK. 

Parliament can legislate on any subject matter, meaning there are no limits on what they can make laws about. An example of this is the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949 which limited the powers of the House of Lords to block a Bill by voting against it. 

Parliament cannot bind their sucessor, meaning each new Parliament should be free to make or change what laws they wish. There are some laws which cannot be repealed, e.g. Act of Settlement in 1700 changed the line of sucession to the throne. It affected who was entitled to be King or Queen so after 300 years this could not be repealed.

Laws made by Parliament cannot be overruled by others, even where the Act of Parliament  may have been made because of incorrect information. See the case of British Railways Board v Pickin.

One limitation to Parliamentary supremacy is the membership of the European Union. The UK joined the European Union in 1973 by passing the European Communities Act 1972, this membership means that European Union law takes priority over English Law. e,g, Merchant Shipping Act 1988 states that 75% of directors and shareholders in certain businesses had to be British , this contradicted EU law and there was changed as discussed in the Factortame case.

The separation of powers

The theory of the separation of powers was first put forward by Montesquieu, a French political theorist in the 18^th century.  The theory states that there are 3 functions of the state: 

• The Executive (government) have strict authority and responsibility to administer the law. 
• The Legislative (parliament)  make the laws and are also authorised to raise taxes and other money bills.                                
• The Judiciary (the judges) apply the law

Why should they be separate? 

• To stop one arm from gaining absolute power and abusing the power they are given. 
• To allow each arm to become more specialised. 
• To stop bias decisions being made (e.g. if a judge makes a law and then tries a case dealing with this law, he may make the wrong decision because of the opinion that has already been made.