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
30 Expert reports.
(1) An expert report shall be admissible as evidence in criminal proceedings, whether or not the person making it attends to give oral evidence in those proceedings.
(2) If it is proposed that the person making the report shall not give oral evidence, the report shall only be admissible with the leave of the court.
(3) For the purpose of determining whether to give leave the court shall have regard—
(a) to the contents of the report;
(b) to the reasons why it is proposed that the person making the report shall not give oral evidence;
(c) to any risk, having regard in particular to whether it is likely to be possible to controvert statements in the report if the person making it does not attend to give oral evidence in the proceedings, that its admission or exclusion will result in unfairness to the accused or, if there is more than one, to any of them; and
(d) to any other circumstances that appear to the court to be relevant.
(4) An expert report, when admitted, shall be evidence of any fact or opinion of which the person making it could have given oral evidence.
(4A) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(5) In this section “expert report” means a written report by a person dealing wholly or mainly with matters on which he is (or would if living be) qualified to give expert evidence.
Your change, as a redline
30 Expert reports.
(1) An expert report shall be admissible as evidence in criminal proceedings, whether or not the person making it attends to give oral evidence in those proceedings.
(2) If it is proposed that the person making the report shall not give oral evidence, the report shall only be admissible with the leave of the court.
(3) For the purpose of determining whether to give leave the court shall have regard—
(a) to the contents of the report;
(b) to the reasons why it is proposed that the person making the report shall not give oral evidence;
(c) to any risk, having regard in particular to whether it is likely to be possible to controvert statements in the report if the person making it does not attend to give oral evidence in the proceedings, that its admission or exclusion will result in unfairness to the accused or, if there is more than one, to any of them; and
(d) to any other circumstances that appear to the court to be relevant.
(4) An expert report, when admitted, shall be evidence of any fact or opinion of which the person making it could have given oral evidence.
(4A) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(5) In this section “expert report” means a written report by a person dealing wholly or mainly with matters on which he is (or would if living be) qualified to give expert evidence.
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.