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
60 Amendments to sections 89 and 161 of the Water Resources Act 1991.
(1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(3) In section 161 of that Act (anti-pollution works and operations) in subsection (1), after paragraph (b) there shall be inserted the words— “ and, in either case, the Agency shall be entitled to carry out investigations for the purpose of establishing the source of the matter and the identity of the person who has caused or knowingly permitted it to be present in controlled waters or at a place from which it was likely, in the opinion of the Agency, to enter controlled waters. ”
(4) In subsection (3) of that section (Agency entitled to recover expenses of works or operations from the person responsible for the pollution) for the words “or operations” there shall be substituted the words “ operations or investigations ”.
(5) In subsection (4) of that section (exception for expenses of works or operations in respect of water from an abandoned mine)—
(a) for the words “or operations” there shall be substituted the words “ operations or investigations ”; and
(b) after the words “an abandoned mine” there shall be inserted the words “ or an abandoned part of a mine ”.
(6) After that subsection there shall be inserted—
(4A) Subsection (4) above shall not apply to the owner or former operator of any mine or part of a mine if the mine or part in question became abandoned after 31st December 1999.
(4B) Subsections (3B) and (3C) of section 89 above shall apply in relation to subsections (4) and (4A) above as they apply in relation to subsections (3) and (3A) of that section.
(7) In subsection (6) of that section (definitions), after the definition of “controlled waters” there shall be inserted—
“expenses” includes costs;
.
Your change, as a redline
60 Amendments to sections 89 and 161 of the Water Resources Act 1991.
(1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(3) In section 161 of that Act (anti-pollution works and operations) in subsection (1), after paragraph (b) there shall be inserted the words— “ and, in either case, the Agency shall be entitled to carry out investigations for the purpose of establishing the source of the matter and the identity of the person who has caused or knowingly permitted it to be present in controlled waters or at a place from which it was likely, in the opinion of the Agency, to enter controlled waters. ”
(4) In subsection (3) of that section (Agency entitled to recover expenses of works or operations from the person responsible for the pollution) for the words “or operations” there shall be substituted the words “ operations or investigations ”.
(5) In subsection (4) of that section (exception for expenses of works or operations in respect of water from an abandoned mine)—
(a) for the words “or operations” there shall be substituted the words “ operations or investigations ”; and
(b) after the words “an abandoned mine” there shall be inserted the words “ or an abandoned part of a mine ”.
(6) After that subsection there shall be inserted—
(4A) Subsection (4) above shall not apply to the owner or former operator of any mine or part of a mine if the mine or part in question became abandoned after 31st December 1999.
(4B) Subsections (3B) and (3C) of section 89 above shall apply in relation to subsections (4) and (4A) above as they apply in relation to subsections (3) and (3A) of that section.
(7) In subsection (6) of that section (definitions), after the definition of “controlled waters” there shall be inserted—
“expenses” includes costs;
.
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.