> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.opendemocracy.net/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# More bills, please, we’re British
- URL: https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/more-bills-please-we-re-british/
- Published: 2008-12-05T14:12:49.000Z
- Updated: 2019-02-14T22:42:25.000Z
- Author: Susanna Kalitowski
- Tags: #en, #Migrated, #Import 2026-04-09 18:49

**Susanna Kalitowski (London,** [**Hansard Society**](http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/?ref=opendemocracy.net)**):** The standard media line on yesterday’s [Queen’s Speech](http://www.number10.gov.uk/Page17665?ref=opendemocracy.net) is that it was ‘[thin’](http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/cb3ae9e4-c185-11dd-831e-000077b07658.html?nclick%5Fcheck=1&ref=opendemocracy.net) on legislation and, by extension, ideas. Only 15 bills were announced compared to the 18 previewed in May. Last year’s Queen’s Speech contained a whopping 29 bills, and there were 25 in 2006\. The government’s explanation for this year’s shortfall is that it needs to concentrate its resources on the economic downturn. Pundits are speculating that it is indicative of a likely [early election](http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/dec/04/queens-speech-economy?ref=opendemocracy.net).

This predictably cynical reaction to the ‘[slimline’](http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/patrick%5F%5Fhennessy%5F/blog/2008/12/03/queens%5Fspeech%5Felection%5Fcountdown%5Fstarts%5Fhere?ref=opendemocracy.net) programme provides one possible explanation for the [substantial increase](http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/notes/snsg-02911.pdf?ref=opendemocracy.net) in the amount of legislation in recent years. In Britain, a large number of bills has become a sign of a government’s strength, authority and capacity for innovation.

When the Hansard Society interviewed politicians for our extensive [study on law making](http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/blogs/publications/archive/2008/07/17/new-research-on-influencing-legislation-launched.aspx?ref=opendemocracy.net), we were told that the predominant culture within government inspires the creation of more and more legislation – even though much of it is superseded before it can actually be implemented.

Parliamentarians were open in admitting that they found it difficult to scrutinise so much legislation effectively – and that they often do not understand the bills they are examining. Many confessed that the content of anywhere from a quarter to a half of all the legislation they voted on was effectively a mystery to them.

They also pointed out that more bills means less time for Parliament’s other vital work: select committee scrutiny of government departments, debates on important issues of the day and examination of secondary or delegated legislation – where much of the real detail of the laws that affect us on a daily basis is contained. It could also allow time to conduct [post-legislative scrutiny](http://www.lawcom.gov.uk/post%5Fleg%5Fscrutiny.htm?ref=opendemocracy.net), reviewing and improving existing legislation, an activity very seldom undertaken.

It is time for a more mature national debate on the government’s annual legislative programme. Bigger is not necessarily better – and many policies do not actually require new legislation. A reduction in the number of bills taken through Parliament would allow for much more detailed scrutiny and permit more time for other equally important work. This year’s Queen’s Speech is a good start.