Write the words of this act the way you think they should read. Solon shows your change as a redline against the published text and pins it to that exact text, so it can never be applied to wording you did not see.
Change 1
As published
66 Transfer of jurisdiction to Crown Court
(1) The Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (c. 29) is amended as follows.
(2) In section 343 (judges)—
(a) in subsection (2) for “or a money laundering investigation” substitute “ , a money laundering investigation or a detained cash investigation ”, and
(b) in subsection (3) omit “or a detained cash investigation”.
(3) In section 344 (courts)—
(a) in paragraph (a) for “or a money laundering investigation” substitute “ , a money laundering investigation or a detained cash investigation ”, and
(b) in paragraph (b) omit “or a detained cash investigation”.
(4) In section 350 (government departments), in subsection (5)—
(a) in paragraph (a) for “or a money laundering investigation” substitute “ , a money laundering investigation or a detained cash investigation ”, and
(b) in paragraph (b) omit “or a detained cash investigation”.
(5) In section 351 (supplementary provisions in connection with production orders and orders to grant entry), in subsection (8) omit “or a detained cash investigation”.
(6) In section 355 (further provisions: confiscation and money laundering), in subsection (1)(a) for “or a money laundering investigation” substitute “ , a money laundering investigation or a detained cash investigation ”.
(7) In section 356 (further provisions: civil recovery and detained cash)—
(a) in the title omit “and detained cash”,
(b) in subsection (1) omit “or detained cash investigations”,
(c) in subsection (10) for “if the appropriate person has reasonable” substitute “ if an appropriate officer has reasonable ”, and
(d) omit subsections (11) and (12).
Your change, as a redline
66 Transfer of jurisdiction to Crown Court
(1) The Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (c. 29) is amended as follows.
(2) In section 343 (judges)—
(a) in subsection (2) for “or a money laundering investigation” substitute “ , a money laundering investigation or a detained cash investigation ”, and
(b) in subsection (3) omit “or a detained cash investigation”.
(3) In section 344 (courts)—
(a) in paragraph (a) for “or a money laundering investigation” substitute “ , a money laundering investigation or a detained cash investigation ”, and
(b) in paragraph (b) omit “or a detained cash investigation”.
(4) In section 350 (government departments), in subsection (5)—
(a) in paragraph (a) for “or a money laundering investigation” substitute “ , a money laundering investigation or a detained cash investigation ”, and
(b) in paragraph (b) omit “or a detained cash investigation”.
(5) In section 351 (supplementary provisions in connection with production orders and orders to grant entry), in subsection (8) omit “or a detained cash investigation”.
(6) In section 355 (further provisions: confiscation and money laundering), in subsection (1)(a) for “or a money laundering investigation” substitute “ , a money laundering investigation or a detained cash investigation ”.
(7) In section 356 (further provisions: civil recovery and detained cash)—
(a) in the title omit “and detained cash”,
(b) in subsection (1) omit “or detained cash investigations”,
(c) in subsection (10) for “if the appropriate person has reasonable” substitute “ if an appropriate officer has reasonable ”, and
(d) omit subsections (11) and (12).
One line that says what changes, such as "Halve the dog tax".
Who it helps, what it costs, what it fixes. It is what persuades people to support it.
A proposal here is not law. Support on Solon is evidence that people want the change; the official route says what it takes to make it law.
Sign in to file your proposal. What you have written stays on this page.
Ask what your change would do, who would gain and who would bear a cost, and where something like it is already law. The assistant reads your draft as it stands, cites the law and the studies it finds, and takes no side. What you file stays yours.