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
90 Treaty state suppliers: non-discrimination
(1) A contracting authority may not, in carrying out a procurement, discriminate against a treaty state supplier.
(2) A contracting authority discriminates against a treaty state supplier if it treats the supplier less favourably than it treats, or would treat, a United Kingdom supplier or other treaty state supplier because of—
(a) the supplier’s association with the supplier’s treaty state, or
(b) the supplier’s lack of association with—
(i) the United Kingdom, or
(ii) another treaty state.
(3) On a comparison of cases for the purposes of subsection (2), there must be no material difference between the circumstances relating to each case.
(4) In this section, a reference to a supplier’s association with a state includes a reference to the fact that the state is the place of origin of goods, services or works supplied by the supplier.
(5) In this section, a “treaty state” means a state, territory or organisation of states or territories that is party to an international agreement specified in Schedule 9, other than the United Kingdom.
(6) And, in subsection (2)(a), a treaty state is a supplier’s treaty state if the supplier is entitled to the benefits of such an international agreement by reference to that treaty state being party to the agreement.
(7) In this Act, “United Kingdom supplier” means a supplier that is—
(a) established in, or controlled or mainly funded from, the United Kingdom, a British Overseas Territory or a Crown Dependency, and
(b) is not a treaty state supplier.
Your change, as a redline
90 Treaty state suppliers: non-discrimination
(1) A contracting authority may not, in carrying out a procurement, discriminate against a treaty state supplier.
(2) A contracting authority discriminates against a treaty state supplier if it treats the supplier less favourably than it treats, or would treat, a United Kingdom supplier or other treaty state supplier because of—
(a) the supplier’s association with the supplier’s treaty state, or
(b) the supplier’s lack of association with—
(i) the United Kingdom, or
(ii) another treaty state.
(3) On a comparison of cases for the purposes of subsection (2), there must be no material difference between the circumstances relating to each case.
(4) In this section, a reference to a supplier’s association with a state includes a reference to the fact that the state is the place of origin of goods, services or works supplied by the supplier.
(5) In this section, a “treaty state” means a state, territory or organisation of states or territories that is party to an international agreement specified in Schedule 9, other than the United Kingdom.
(6) And, in subsection (2)(a), a treaty state is a supplier’s treaty state if the supplier is entitled to the benefits of such an international agreement by reference to that treaty state being party to the agreement.
(7) In this Act, “United Kingdom supplier” means a supplier that is—
(a) established in, or controlled or mainly funded from, the United Kingdom, a British Overseas Territory or a Crown Dependency, and
(b) is not a treaty state supplier.
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.