Be it resolved that the legislative system used to create law has a complicated structure and process, as there is an abundance of flaws, faults, and inefficiency within many aspects of this process. The problems start with the First Reading, which is just that: a reading. There is no discussion, debate, or commentary. This is very impractical and unnecessary, as everyone in Parliament, especially the Cabinet, should have already read the bill, before they discuss or debate it. After all, why are they paid for reminders over what they are discussing? Bill 157, a bill concerning the creation of distance education programs, still has not gone onto a Second Reading for almost a year, which raises the question: How much longer will it be, before any progress is made? The First Reading, if anything, is a formality, as well as a roadblock, which many bills cannot seem to pass, and should be eliminated altogether.
There are many flaws found with the committees assigned before and after the Second Reading. These committees are of a select group of people in Parliament, who come together to pick apart a bill, adding their own suggestions and views. It is unfair that one group has all the say in the major editing. Parliament has a much broader viewpoint than that of the committees, as they have a larger variety of perspectives. Parliament, then, can bring about many more changes to a bill, than just one committee can. Another issue is that a bill can be sent to a committee, before it is ever given a 2nd reading. This, again, is unnecessary, as all of Parliament should see the bill in its original format, without any changes.
The Third Reading has no use in the bill making process. All the...