As the summer Parliamentary recess looms, the rush is on for ministers to move new bills forward. But the increasingly
shortened time-scale for bills passing through is cutting off proper debate at the knees, says John Ludlow.





Many believed that the Charities Bill had simply died a death, and were surprised when it was finally resurrected last month. The joint parliamentary committee undertaking pre-legislative scrutiny on the draft Legal Services Bill has completed its evidence-taking in record time. This is not by choice, but because the committee has only been given eight working weeks to produce its final report, which must be with the Department for Constitutional Affairs by the time Parliament rises for the summer on 25 July.





The minister responsible for the Bill, Bridget Prentice, defended the short timescale in her recent appearance before the committee, citing the thorough consultation exercise already undertaken and the department's desire to introduce the Bill proper as early as possible in the next session. However, it is clear that the members of the committee are none too happy with the deadline, and the chairman, Lord Hunt, has reserved the right to ask for extra time if need be.





In fact, the approach of the summer recess is having a similar impact across Parliament. While it will not mark the end of the session - there are a few weeks of 'over-spill' left in October - ministers clearly want to move their bills on as far as possible, preferably to the statute book.





But while this sounds laudable, for some measures it simply means the curtailment of much-needed debate. The Company Law Reform Bill, for example, has only been allocated nine days in Commons committee and only one day on report. For a complex and highly technical bill of 925 clauses and 16 schedules, this is totally inadequate, especially as it is now said that the government plans to introduce another 254 clauses in committee as a consolidation exercise.





In other areas, the government is shortening the time between stages to get bills through. Usually, a 'two-weekend' rule operates between second reading and committee stage, to allow for the drafting and tabling of amendments. But in the case of the NHS Redress Bill, this has been reduced to one. This is far from satisfactory, as members have less time to marshall their arguments and to prepare for scrutiny. For lobbying organisations such as the Law Society, it makes our job that bit more difficult.

None of this would matter so much if bills were better managed overall. But the simple fact is that some, such as the Company Law Reform Bill, are introduced too late in the session to receive proper scrutiny. That Bill was debated for the first time in January 2006, when it could have easily been launched six months earlier.





Others appear early enough, but seem to enter into a kind of limbo part way through their parliamentary progress and then have to race at the end. For example, there was a gap of seven months between the Charities Bill leaving the Lords and receiving its second reading in the Commons. Many at the time believed that the Bill had simply died a death, and were surprised when it was finally resurrected last month.





The good news, however, is that the government has been prepared to make concessions here and there, most notably on the inheritance tax provisions in the Finance Bill. It will now be possible to defer entitlement to 25 using the new so-called 'age-18-to-25 trust', while some of the restrictions applying originally to life interests trusts created in wills for spouses, or arising on intestacy, have been removed. This has been warmly welcomed by the Law Society and others, but many existing trusts will still be adversely affected by the proposals. Pressure is being kept up on the Treasury, therefore, as the Bill enters its final Commons stage.





Concessions are also being sought elsewhere - such as in the Compensation Bill, where ministers are still vehemently defending their 'negligence clause' - and in the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill, where some important changes have been made but where more are needed.





But it is fair to say that most of the controversial bills of this session have already received Royal Assent, and we should not expect many more fireworks - at least where bills are concerned. The biggest parliamentary battles currently being fought are around the issues of sentencing, immigration, judicial independence and the role of the Human Rights Act, none of which is - as yet - a legislative issue.





That will come in the new session of Parliament, beginning in November, where a raft of Home Office measures will be joined by the Legal Services Bill, the Coroners Reform Bill and others. The second session of a Parliament is often the busiest of all, and this one will probably prove to be no exception.





John Ludlow is head of the parliamentary unit at the Law Society