eval

• ++ long process for bill to become act of parliament, ensures can be effectively scrutinised and checked for errors
• ++ first reading allows opposition to obtain copy of bill, prepare arguments for debate at second reading
• ++ whips ensure mps vote with party and agree with policies even if personally disagree as public vote for mp to represent them according to party they support
• ++ public bill committee scrutinise bill looking for errors and suggesting changes
• ++ house of lords contains many experts, 'safety net' as they often find errors house of commons have missed
• ++ house of lords may restrict governments powers but cannot prevent bill becoming law
• ++ acts of parliament receive royal crest, gives king role in parliament
• ++ private members bills allow backbench mps and members of opposition to create laws which government has not timetabled
• -- lengthy process, some bills run out of time, reintroduced in next parliament or not at all, some rushed process and published containing errors eg. dangerous dogs act 1991
• -- professor zander called first reading 'pure moment of nothing' (waste of time)
• -- public bill committee always have majority of government mps on it, may control suggested changes
• -- house of lords unelected therefore undemocratic
• -- whip system seen as undemocratic, whips accused of bully tactics
• -- role of king tradition, cannot refuse, staff often sign on behalf, stage seen as rubber stamping exercise
• -- ballot restricts number of private members bills considered (20 per year) 10 minute rule prevents most from getting proper chance to explain, other mps filibuster