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
82 Defence of mistake, accident, etc.
(1) In any proceedings for an offence under any of the following provisions of this Act, namely, sections 68(1A), (4)(b) and (c), 69(4)(c), 70(2), 71(2)(b) 73, 73A and 74A, it shall, subject to subsection (2) of this section, be a defence for the person charged to prove—
(a) that the commission of the offence was due to a mistake, or to reliance on information supplied to him, or to the act or default of another person, or to an accident or some other cause beyond his control; and
(b) that he took all reasonable precautions and exercised all due diligence to avoid the commission of such an offence by himself or any person under his control.
(2) If in any case the defence provided by the foregoing subsection involves the allegation that the commission of the offence was due to the act or default of another person or to reliance on information supplied by another person, the person charged shall not, without leave of the court, be entitled to rely on that defence unless, within a period ending seven clear days before the hearing, he has served on the prosecutor a notice in writing giving such information identifying or assisting in the identification of that other person as was then in his possession.
Your change, as a redline
82 Defence of mistake, accident, etc.
(1) In any proceedings for an offence under any of the following provisions of this Act, namely, sections 68(1A), (4)(b) and (c), 69(4)(c), 70(2), 71(2)(b) 73, 73A and 74A, it shall, subject to subsection (2) of this section, be a defence for the person charged to prove—
(a) that the commission of the offence was due to a mistake, or to reliance on information supplied to him, or to the act or default of another person, or to an accident or some other cause beyond his control; and
(b) that he took all reasonable precautions and exercised all due diligence to avoid the commission of such an offence by himself or any person under his control.
(2) If in any case the defence provided by the foregoing subsection involves the allegation that the commission of the offence was due to the act or default of another person or to reliance on information supplied by another person, the person charged shall not, without leave of the court, be entitled to rely on that defence unless, within a period ending seven clear days before the hearing, he has served on the prosecutor a notice in writing giving such information identifying or assisting in the identification of that other person as was then in his possession.
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.