text:
NBA draft lottery
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
The NBA Draft lottery is an annual event held by the National Basketball Association (NBA), in which the teams who had missed the playoffs that previous year participate in a lottery process to determine the draft order in the NBA draft. The NBA Draft lottery started in 1985. In the NBA draft, the teams obtain the rights to amateur U.S. college basketball players and other eligible players, including international players. The lottery winner would get the first selection in the draft. The term "lottery pick" denotes a draft pick whose position is determined through the lottery, while the non-playoff teams involved in the process are often called "lottery teams."
Under the current rules, only the top three picks are decided by the lottery, and are chosen from the 14 teams that do not make the playoffs. The team with the worst record, or the team that holds the draft rights of the team with the worst record, has the best chance to obtain a higher draft pick. After the top three positions are selected (from the lottery slotting system), the remainder of the first-round draft order is in inverse order of the win-loss record for the remaining teams, or the teams who originally held the lottery rights if they were traded. The lottery does not determine the draft order in the subsequent rounds of the draft.
Beginning with the 2019 draft, the NBA will change the lottery odds (the bottom three teams will all have an equal 14% chance of winning the top pick) and increase the number of teams selected in the lottery from three to four.
Contents
[hide]
1 History
1.1 Before 1985: Territorial picks and coin flip
1.2 1985–1989: Early lottery system
1.3 Since 1990: Weighted lottery system
2 Process
3 Lottery ceremony
4 Lottery winners
5 See also
6 References
7 External links
History[edit]
Before 1985: Territorial picks and coin flip[edit]
Further information: NBA territorial pick
In the earlier drafts, the teams would draft in reverse order of their win-loss record. However, a special territorial-pick rule allowed a team to draft a player from its local area. If a team decided to use its territorial pick, it forfeited its first-round pick in the draft. The territorial pick rules remained until the NBA revamped the draft system in 1966.[1]
In 1966, the NBA introduced a coin flip between the worst teams in each division to determine who would obtain the first overall draft pick. The team who lost the coin flip would get the second pick, while the rest of the first-round picks were determined in reverse order of the win-loss record. In this system, the second-worst team would never have a chance to obtain the first pick if it was in the same division as the worst team. The coin flip meant that both teams had an equal chance to draft first. The coin-flip system remained in operation until 1984.[1]
1985–1989: Early lottery system[edit]
After the 1984 coin flip, which was won by the Houston Rockets, the NBA introduced the lottery system to counter the accusations that the Rockets and several other teams were deliberately losing their regular season games in order to secure the worst record and consequently the chance to obtain the first pick.[2][3] The lottery system involved a random drawing of an envelope from a hopper. Inside each of the envelopes was the name of a non-playoff team. The team whose envelope was drawn first would get the first pick. The process was then repeated until the rest of the lottery picks were determined. In this system, each non-playoff team had an equal chance to obtain the first pick. The rest of the first-round picks were determined in reverse order of the win-loss record.[4]
Starting from 1987, the NBA modified the lottery system so that only the first three picks were determined by the lottery. After the three envelopes were drawn, the remaining non-playoff teams would select in reverse order of their win-loss record. This meant that the team with the worst record could receive no worse than the fourth selection, and the second-worst team could pick no lower than fifth, and so on.[5]
The New York Knicks were the first winner of the lottery in 1985. They selected Georgetown University standout Patrick Ewing with their first overall pick. However, speculation arose that the NBA had rigged the lottery so that the Knicks would be assured to get the first pick.[2][3][4] Even though the envelope system was highly criticized, it was used until 1989 before being replaced by the weighted lottery system in 1990.[6]
Since 1990: Weighted lottery system[edit]
In 1990, the NBA changed the format of the lottery to give the team with the worst record the best chance of landing the first pick. The worst non-playoff team that season would have 11 chances, out of 66, to obtain the first pick. The second worst would have 10 chances, and so on. Similarly to the previous system, the weighted lottery system was also used only to determine the first three picks, while the rest of the teams selected in reverse order of their win-loss records.
Despite the weighted odds, the Orlando Magic managed to win the lottery in 1993 with only one chance to obtain the first pick as it was the best non-playoff team in the previous season. In October 1993, the NBA modified the lottery system to give the team with the worst record a higher chance to win the draft lottery and to decrease the better teams' chances to win. The new system increased the chances of the worst team obtaining the first pick in the draft from 16.7 percent to 25 percent, while decreasing the chances of the best non-playoff team from 1.5 percent to 0.5 percent.
In the new system, 14 numbered table tennis balls were used. Then, a four-number combination from the 14 balls were drawn to determine the lottery winner. Prior to the draft, the NBA assigns 1,000 possible combinations to the non-playoff teams (the 11-12-13-14 combination is ignored and redrawn). The process was then repeated to determine the second and third pick.[1] The table below shows the lottery chances and the probabilities for each team to win the first pick in the weighted lottery system in 1993 and 1994 draft.[7]
In 2014, the NBA Board of Governors voted on a proposed reform to the lottery.[8] If the proposed changes passed, the four worst teams in the league would have been given identical odds (around 11 percent) at winning the top pick. The fifth team would have a 10 percent chance and the odds would decrease for each team picking after.[9] The proposed changes would take away the advantage of having the worst record in the league (currently the worst team is given a 25% chance at the pick), and would work to keep teams competitive throughout the entire season. The final vote was 17-13 in favor of the reform, but that was short of the required 23 votes needed to push the change through.[10]
In 2016, Dikembe Mutombo made people question the draft's legitimacy when he prematurely tweeted a congratulatory message to the Philadelphia 76ers for receiving the first pick hours before the lottery was conducted. Philadelphia did indeed win the first overall pick.[11] Further questions were raised a bit when the NBA Draft revealed that every spot remained exactly the same as it was before the event took place, which was the first occurrence in draft lottery history. A year later, Lakers executive Magic Johnson raised even further questions about the draft process with him assuring head coach Luke Walton that the Lakers would acquire a top 3 pick for the 2017 NBA draft after an interview Walton had on May 4, 2017, twelve days before the draft lottery commenced and moved up to the second pick.[12] As a result of the way teams like the Philadelphia 76ers were manipulating draft odds in their favor by losing games on purpose, starting September 28, 2017 with the end of the 2018 NBA draft, the NBA would implement a new system discouraging teams from going through Philadelphia's route in the mid-2010s by not only giving the worst three teams equal odds at the #1 pick, but also increasing their odds at going down within the draft with four teams being selected instead of the usual three.
1993 draft lottery
1994 draft lottery
Team
1992–1993
record
Chances
(out of 66)
Probability
Team
1993–1994
record
Chances
(out of 1000)
Probability
1 Dallas 11–71 11 16.67% Dallas 13–69 250 25.00%
2 Minnesota 19–63 10 15.15% Detroit 20–62 164 16.40%
3 Washington 22–60 9 13.64% Minnesota 20–62 164 16.40%
4 Sacramento 25–57 8 12.12% Milwaukee 20–62 163 16.30%
5 Philadelphia 26–56 7 10.61% Washington 24–58 94 9.40%
6 Milwaukee 28–54 6 9.09% Philadelphia 25–57 66 6.60%
7 Golden State 34–48 5 7.58% L.A. Clippers 27–55 44 4.40%
8 Denver 36–46 4 6.06% Sacramento 28–54 27 2.70%
9 Miami 36–46 3 4.55% Boston 32–50 15 1.50%
10 Detroit 40–42 2 3.03% L.A. Lakers 33–49 8 0.80%
11 Orlando 41–41 1 1.52% Charlotte 41–41 5 0.50%
In 1995, the NBA had an agreement with the two expansion franchises, the Toronto Raptors and the Vancouver Grizzlies that neither team would be eligible to obtain the first overall pick in the 1996, 1997 and 1998 drafts. The Raptors won the 1996 lottery but were forced to settle for the second pick. Another combination was drawn and resulted in the Philadelphia 76ers getting the first pick.[13] Two years later, the Grizzlies won the lottery and likewise had to pick second in the draft, while the L.A. Clippers obtained the first pick.[14]
Process[edit]
The lottery is normally held during either the third or fourth week of May.
To determine the winner, fourteen ping pong balls numbered 1–14 are placed in a standard lottery machine and four balls are randomly selected from the lot. Just as in most traditional lotteries, the order in which the numbers are drawn is not important. That is, 1–2–3–4 is considered to be the same as 4–3–2–1. There are a total of 1,001 combinations (or 14! / (10! x 4!)). Of these combinations, one outcome is disregarded and the remaining outcomes are distributed among the 14 non-playoff NBA teams. The combination 11–12–13–14 (in any order that those numbers are drawn) is not assigned and is ignored if drawn; this has never occurred in practice.
In the event a lottery pick is traded to another team, the record of the original team (whose pick it was before the trade) still determines eligibility for the lottery, and assignment of chances.
Since 2005, with 30 NBA teams, 16 qualify for the playoffs and the remaining 14 teams enter in the draft lottery. These 14 teams were ranked in reverse order of their regular season record and assigned the following number of chances, up to 2018:
250 combinations, 25.0% chance of receiving the No. 1 pick
199 combinations, 19.9% chance
156 combinations, 15.6% chance
119 combinations, 11.9% chance
88 combinations, 8.8% chance
63 combinations, 6.3% chance
43 combinations, 4.3% chance
28 combinations, 2.8% chance
17 combinations, 1.7% chance
11 combinations, 1.1% chance
8 combinations, 0.8% chance
7 combinations, 0.7% chance
6 combinations, 0.6% chance
5 combinations, 0.5% chance
The following table listed the odds for each seed to get specific picks if there were no ties (rounded to three decimal places).
Seed Chances 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th 11th 12th 13th 14th
1 250 .250 .215 .178 .357 – – – – – – – – – –
2 199 .199 .188 .171 .319 .123 – – – – – – – – –
3 156 .156 .157 .156 .226 .265 .040 – – – – – – – –
4 119 .119 .126 .133 .099 .351 .160 .012 – – – – – – –
5 88 .088 .097 .107 – .261 .360 .084 .004 – – – – – –
6 63 .063 .071 .081 – – .439 .305 .040 .001 – – – – –
7 43 .043 .049 .058 – – – .599 .232 .018 .000 – – – –
8 28 .028 .033 .039 – – – – .724 .168 .008 .000 – – –
9 17 .017 .020 .024 – – – – – .813 .122 .004 .000 – –
10 11 .011 .013 .016 – – – – – – .870 .089 .002 .000 –
11 8 .008 .009 .012 – – – – – – – .907 .063 .001 .000
12 7 .007 .008 .010 – – – – – – – – .935 .039 .000
13 6 .006 .007 .009 – – – – – – – – – .960 .018
14 5 .005 .006 .007 – – – – – – – – – – .982
Beginning with the 2019 draft, the NBA will change the lottery odds as follows:
140 combinations, 14.0% chance of receiving the No. 1 pick
140 combinations, 14.0% chance
140 combinations, 14.0% chance
125 combinations, 12.5% chance
105 combinations, 10.5% chance
90 combinations, 9.0% chance
75 combinations, 7.5% chance
60 combinations, 6.0% chance
45 combinations, 4.5% chance
30 combinations, 3.0% chance
20 combinations, 2.0% chance
15 combinations, 1.5% chance
10 combinations, 1.0% chance
5 combinations, 0.5% chance
The following table lists the odds for each seed to get specific picks, beginning with the 2019 draft, if there were no ties (rounded to three decimal places).
Seed Chances 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th 11th 12th 13th 14th
1 140 .140 .134 .127 .120 .479 – – – – – – – – –
2 140 .140 .134 .127 .120 .278 .200 – – – – – – – –
3 140 .140 .134 .127 .120 .148 .260 .070 – – – – – – –
4 125 .125 .122 .119 .115 .072 .257 .167 .022 – – – – – –
5 105 .105 .105 .106 .105 .022 .196 .267 .087 .006 – – – – –
6 90 .090 .092 .094 .096 – .086 .298 .206 .037 .001 – – – –
7 75 .075 .078 .081 .085 – – .197 .341 .129 .013 .000 – – –
8 60 .060 .063 .067 .072 – – – .345 .321 .067 .004 .000 – –
9 45 .045 .048 .052 .057 – – – – .507 .259 .030 .001 .000 –
10 30 .030 .033 .036 .040 – – – – – .659 .190 .012 .000 .000
11 20 .020 .022 .024 .028 – – – – – – .776 .126 .004 .000
12 15 .015 .017 .019 .021 – – – – – – – .861 .067 .001
13 10 .010 .011 .012 .014 – – – – – – – – .929 .023
14 5 .005 .006 .006 .007 – – – – – – – – – .976
In the event that teams finish with the same record, each tied team receives the average of the total number of combinations for the positions that they occupy. In 2007, the Minnesota Timberwolves and the Portland Trail Blazers tied for the sixth worst record. The average of the 6th and 7th positions in the lottery was taken, resulting in each team getting 53 combinations (the average of 63 and 43). Should the average number not be an integer, a coin flip is then used to determine which team or teams receive the extra combination. The result of the coin flip is also used to determine who receives the earlier pick in the event that neither of the tied teams wins one of the first three picks via the lottery.
The lottery is conducted with witnesses (from the accounting firm Ernst & Young) verifying that all fourteen balls are represented once as they are placed in the lottery machine. The balls are placed in the machine for 20 seconds to randomize before the first ball is drawn. The remaining three balls are drawn at 10-second intervals. NBA officials determine which team holds the winning combination and that franchise is awarded the #1 overall draft pick. The four balls are returned to the machine and the process is repeated to determine the second and third picks. In the event that a combination belongs to a team that has already won its pick (or if the one unassigned combination comes up), the round is repeated until a unique winner is determined. When the first three teams have been determined, the remaining picks are given out based on regular season record with the worst teams getting the highest picks. This assures each team that it can drop no more than three spots from its projected draft position.
In a case where a lottery team trades its pick to a playoff team, the playoff team assumes the lottery team's position in all draft lottery situations, unless provisioned by the conditions of the trade.
Lottery ceremony[edit]
See also: National Basketball Association criticisms and controversies
The drawing of the ping-pong balls is conducted in private, though observed by independent auditors and representatives from each team. The results are subsequently presented in a short ceremony (typically broadcast prior to or during halftime of an NBA playoff game), in which the order of the lottery is announced in reverse order, from the fourteenth selection to the first. Representatives from each NBA franchise with a lottery pick are present at the lottery ceremony.
The decision of not showing the ping-pong balls live has fueled speculation that the NBA will occasionally fix the draft lottery if it can benefit the league. The speculation originated with the 1985 draft lottery that sent Patrick Ewing to New York, with the theory being that the NBA wanted to send the best player in the draft to New York to increase ratings in a large television market. At that time, the NBA used 7 envelopes in a tumbler representing the seven teams with the worst record. Some have speculated[15][16][17] that the envelope containing the Knicks logo was refrigerated beforehand, enabling David Stern to recognize and select it. Another conspiracy theory suggests that one of the seven envelopes was thrown into the tumbler, causing one of the corners to fold. After the envelopes were mixed, Stern took a deep breath before reaching into the tumbler and picking the envelope with the folded corner.[18] No one has ever explained why all the other teams would go along with the fix. Afterward, the Draft Lottery Format was changed to the current ping-pong ball lottery in a private room with team representatives. However, despite the lack of any evidence, conspiracy theories still persist regarding the annual outcome of the lottery.[19][20][21][22]
Lottery winners[edit]
Visual representation of the following table.
The largest upset in the lottery occurred in 1993 when the Magic won the lottery with just a 1.5% chance to win. The second largest upsets occurred in 2008 and 2014 when the Chicago Bulls and Cleveland Cavaliers both won their respective lotteries with just a 1.7% chance.[23] In 1999, the Charlotte Hornets also overcame long odds in the draft lottery when they won the third pick despite having the best record among all non-playoff teams. The Hornets only had a 1.83% chance of winning a top-three pick.[24] Since the lottery was introduced in 1985, only 18 of 30 NBA teams have won the lottery. The Los Angeles Clippers have won five lotteries, although two of them were conveyed to other teams in trades prior to the lottery. The Orlando Magic and Cleveland Cavaliers are second with three lottery wins each. Since the weighted lottery system was introduced in 1990, only four teams with the worst record went on to win the lottery while only four teams with the second-worst record have won the lottery.
Year
Team
Previous season
record
Lottery
chances
Probability
Player selected
1985 New York Knicks 24–58 (3rd-worst) — 7001142900000000000♠14.29%[a] Ewing, PatrickPatrick Ewing
1986 Los Angeles Clippers
(conveyed to the Cleveland Cavaliers via Philadelphia 76ers)[b] 32–50 (7th-worst) — 7001142900000000000♠14.29%[a] Daugherty, BradBrad Daugherty
1987 San Antonio Spurs 28–54 (4th-worst) — 7001142900000000000♠14.29%[a] Robinson, DavidDavid Robinson
1988 Los Angeles Clippers 17–65 (Worst) — 7001142900000000000♠14.29%[a] Manning, DannyDanny Manning
1989 Sacramento Kings 27–55 (6th-worst) — 7001111100000000000♠11.11%[c] Ellison, PervisPervis Ellison
1990 New Jersey Nets 17–65 (Worst) 11 (out of 66) 7001166700000000000♠16.67% Coleman, DerrickDerrick Coleman
1991 Charlotte Hornets 26–56 (5th-worst) 7 (out of 66) 7001106100000000000♠10.61% Johnson, LarryLarry Johnson
1992 Orlando Magic 21–61 (2nd-worst) 10 (out of 66) 7001151500000000000♠15.15% O'Neal, ShaquilleShaquille O'Neal
1993 Orlando Magic
(conveyed to Golden State on draft night) 41–41 (11th-worst) 1 (out of 66) 7000152000000000000♠1.52% Webber, ChrisChris Webber
1994 Milwaukee Bucks 20–62 (2nd-worst) 163 (out of 1000) 7001163000000000000♠16.30% Robinson, GlennGlenn Robinson
1995 Golden State Warriors 26–56 (5th-worst) 94 (out of 1000) 7000940000000000000♠9.40% Smith, JoeJoe Smith
1996 Philadelphia 76ers 18–64 (2nd-worst) 200 (out of 593)[d] 7001337309999999999♠33.73% Iverson, AllenAllen Iverson
1997 San Antonio Spurs 20–62 (3rd-worst) 157 (out of 727)[d] 7001216000000000000♠21.60% Duncan, TimTim Duncan
1998 Los Angeles Clippers 17–65 (3rd-worst) 157 (out of 696)[d] 7001225600000000000♠22.56% Olowokandi, MichaelMichael Olowokandi
1999 Chicago Bulls 13–37[e] (3rd-worst) 157 (out of 1000) 7001157000000000000♠15.70% Brand, EltonElton Brand
2000 New Jersey Nets 31–51 (7th-worst) 44 (out of 1000) 7000440000000000000♠4.40% Martin, KenyonKenyon Martin
2001 Washington Wizards 19–63 (3rd-worst) 157 (out of 1000) 7001157000000000000♠15.70% Brown, KwameKwame Brown
2002 Houston Rockets 28–54 (5th-worst) 89 (out of 1000) 7000890000000000000♠8.90% Yao Ming, Yao Ming
2003 Cleveland Cavaliers 17–65 (T-Worst) 225 (out of 1000) 7001225000000000000♠22.50% James, LeBronLeBron James
2004 Orlando Magic 21–61 (Worst) 250 (out of 1000) 7001250000000000000♠25.00% Howard, DwightDwight Howard
2005 Milwaukee Bucks 30–52 (6th-worst) 63 (out of 1000) 7000630000000000000♠6.30% Bogut, AndrewAndrew Bogut
2006 Toronto Raptors 27–55 (5th-worst) 88 (out of 1000) 7000880000000000000♠8.80% Bargnani, AndreaAndrea Bargnani
2007 Portland Trail Blazers 32–50 (6th-worst) 53 (out of 1000) 7000530000000000000♠5.30% Oden, GregGreg Oden
2008 Chicago Bulls 33–49 (9th-worst) 17 (out of 1000) 7000170000000000000♠1.70% Rose, DerrickDerrick Rose
2009 Los Angeles Clippers 19–63 (2nd-worst)[f] 177 (out of 1000) 7001177000000000000♠17.70% Griffin, BlakeBlake Griffin
2010 Washington Wizards 26–56 (5th-worst) 103 (out of 1000) 7001103000000000000♠10.30% Wall, JohnJohn Wall
2011 Los Angeles Clippers
(conveyed to the Cleveland Cavaliers)[g] 32–50 (8th-worst) 28 (out of 1000) 7000280000000099999♠2.80% Irving, KyrieKyrie Irving
2012 New Orleans Hornets 21–45[h] (T-3rd-worst) 137 (out of 1000) 7001137000000000000♠13.70% Davis, AnthonyAnthony Davis
2013 Cleveland Cavaliers 24–58 (3rd-worst) 156 (out of 1000) 7001156000000000000♠15.60% Bennett, AnthonyAnthony Bennett
2014 Cleveland Cavaliers
(later traded to Minnesota before playing) 33–49 (9th-worst) 17 (out of 1000) 7000170000000000000♠1.70% Wiggins, AndrewAndrew Wiggins
2015 Minnesota Timberwolves 16–66 (Worst) 250 (out of 1000) 7001250000000000000♠25.00% Towns, Karl-AnthonyKarl-Anthony Towns
2016 Philadelphia 76ers 10–72 (Worst) 250 (out of 1000) 7001250000000000000♠25.00% Simmons, BenBen Simmons
2017 Brooklyn Nets
(conveyed to the Philadelphia 76ers via the Boston Celtics) 20–62 (Worst) 250 (out of 1000) 7001250000000000000♠25.00% Fultz, MarkelleMarkelle Fultz
2018 Phoenix Suns 21-61 (Worst) 250 (out of 1000) 7001250000000000000♠25.00%
Notes
^ Jump up to: a b c d From 1985 to 1988, each of the 7 non-playoff teams had an equal chance to win the lottery, i.e. 14.29%.
Jump up ^ The Philadelphia 76ers obtained Los Angeles Clippers' first-round pick in a previous trade on October 6, 1979 that sent Joe Bryant to the Clippers.[25] On June 16, 1986, after the lottery and a day before the draft, the 76ers traded the first pick to the Cleveland Cavaliers in exchange for Roy Hinson.[26]
Jump up ^ In 1989, each of the 9 non-playoff teams had an equal chance to win the lottery, i.e. 11.11%.
^ Jump up to: a b c The Toronto Raptors and the Vancouver Grizzlies were not eligible to win the lottery in 1996, 1997 and 1998 due to their expansion agreement. Therefore, their lottery combinations for the first pick were excluded.
Jump up ^ Due to the 1998–99 NBA lockout, the season was shortened to 50 games per team.[27]
Jump up ^ The Los Angeles Clippers and the Washington Wizards had identical 19–63 records for 2nd-worst record in the NBA. However, the Wizards won the tiebreaker and were awarded one extra lottery combination.[28]
Jump up ^ The Cleveland Cavaliers had two lottery picks, their own pick and the Los Angeles Clippers' pick. The Cavaliers obtained the Clippers' first-round pick from a previous trade on February 24, 2011 that sent Mo Williams and Jamario Moon to the Clippers and Baron Davis to the Cavaliers.[29] The Cavaliers, who had the second-worst record (19–63), had a combined total of 227 chances (22.7%) to win the lottery, which consists of 199 chances (19.9%) from their own pick and 28 chances (2.8%) from the Clippers' pick.[30][31]
Jump up ^ Due to the 2011 NBA lockout, the season was shortened to 66 games per team.[32]
See also[edit]
National Basketball Association portal
References[edit]
General
"Evolution of the Draft and Lottery". NBA.com. Turner Sports Interactive, Inc. Retrieved August 22, 2009.
"Year-by-Year Lottery Probabilities". NBA.com. Turner Sports Interactive, Inc. Retrieved August 22, 2009.
Specific
^ Jump up to: a b c Dengate, Jeff (May 16, 2007). "Let the Ping-Pong Balls Fall". NBA.com. Turner Sports Interactive, Inc. Retrieved August 22, 2009.
^ Jump up to: a b Bondy, Filip (May 22, 2005). "The Draft That Changed It All. Tanks to '84, the lottery was born". NYDailyNews.com. New York: Daily News, L.P. Archived from the original on July 7, 2011. Retrieved August 22, 2009.
^ Jump up to: a b DuPree, David (June 25, 2007). "25 drafts, dozens of stars, one Michael". USA Today. Retrieved August 22, 2009.
^ Jump up to: a b Litke, Jim (March 28, 2007). "Tanking games? If only NBA's bad teams were that good". SportingNews.com. Sporting News. Retrieved August 22, 2009. [dead link]
Jump up ^ "League has used variety of methods to determine No. 1 pick". The Indianapolis Star. May 22, 2007. Retrieved October 4, 2009.
Jump up ^ Blinebury, Fran (May 19, 2009). "Winning the Lottery is easy; picking the right player is not". NBA.com. Turner Sports Interactive, Inc. Archived from the original on May 23, 2009. Retrieved August 22, 2009.
Jump up ^ Florke, Chad R.; Ecker, Mark D. (December 1, 2003). "NBA Draft Lottery Probabilities" (PDF). University of Northern Iowa. Retrieved August 22, 2009.
Jump up ^ "Lottery Reform Vote Set to Pass?". basketballinsiders.com.
Jump up ^ Higin, Sean. "Report: Board of Governors expected to pass draft lottery reform, Sixers and Thunder opposed". probasketballtalk.com. Retrieved 2014-10-21.
Jump up ^ "Lottery reform falls short of passing". ESPN. October 22, 2014. Retrieved April 20, 2015.
Jump up ^ http://www.foxsports.com/nba/story/dikembe-mutombo-tweet-nba-draft-lottery-rigged-76ers-sixers-philadelphia-051716
Jump up ^ https://www.sbnation.com/2017/5/4/15543124/luke-walton-magic-johnson-draft-pick-lakers
Jump up ^ Lawrence, Mitch (January 12, 2003). "'New' Charlotte Gets Fast Break". NYDailyNews.com. New York: Daily News, L.P. Archived from the original on August 28, 2011. Retrieved August 22, 2009.
Jump up ^ "Clippers Get Pick Of The Litter". CBS News. CBS Interactive Inc. May 17, 1998. Retrieved August 22, 2009.
Jump up ^ "Griffin the big gift at lottery's 25th anniversary". USA Today. May 18, 2009. Retrieved May 20, 2010.
Jump up ^ McManis, Sam (May 14, 1985). "NBA's New Showtime: It's Called the Lottery". Los Angeles Times. Retrieved May 20, 2010.
Jump up ^ Rovell, Darren (May 16, 2002). "NBA out to prove conspiracy theorists wrong". ESPN. Archived from the original on November 4, 2012. Retrieved April 8, 2012.
Jump up ^ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bX1kMlG8c7Y
Jump up ^ Dengate, Jeff (May 16, 2007). "Let the Ping-Pong Balls Fall". NBA.com. Archived from the original on June 13, 2012.
Jump up ^ Schoenfield, David (June 29, 2009). "The first lottery draft still rates the best". ESPN. Archived from the original on June 27, 2009.
Jump up ^ Helin, Kurt. "David Stern expects your draft conspiracy theories now". nbcsports.com. Archived from the original on June 13, 2012.
Jump up ^ "David Stern, Jim Rome battle on radio". ESPN. June 13, 2012. Archived from the original on June 13, 2012.
Jump up ^ Matuszewski, Erik (May 21, 2008). "Bulls Win NBA's Draft Lottery, Eye Beasley, Rose With Top Pick". Bloomberg. Bloomberg L.P. Retrieved August 22, 2009.
Jump up ^ "NBA.com:Year-By-Year Lottery Probabilities".
Jump up ^ "All-Time Transactions". NBA.com/Clippers. Turner Sports Interactive, Inc. Retrieved August 22, 2009.
Jump up ^ "Roy Hinson Stats". basketball-reference.com. Retrieved April 8, 2012.
Jump up ^ Beck, Howard (February 14, 2009). "N.B.A. and Union Are Discussing New Labor Deal". The New York Times. Retrieved February 22, 2009.
Jump up ^ "Ties broken for Draft 2009 order of selection". NBA.com. Turner Sports Interactive, Inc. April 17, 2009. Archived from the original on April 20, 2009. Retrieved August 17, 2010.
Jump up ^ "Baron Davis traded for Williams, Moon". ESPN. February 24, 2011. Retrieved April 8, 2012.
Jump up ^ "Cavaliers win draft lottery, will pick No. 1". NBA.com. Turner Sports Interactive, Inc. May 17, 2011. Archived from the original on May 21, 2011. Retrieved May 18, 2011.
Jump up ^ "Cavs win No. 1 pick; Wolves 2nd". ESPN. May 18, 2011. Retrieved May 18, 2011.
Jump up ^ Beck, Howard (November 28, 2011). "Two Exhibition Games for N.B.A. Teams". The New York Times. Retrieved November 28, 2011.
External links[edit]
NBA.com
NBA.com: NBA Draft History
The Hoops Report: NBA Draft Lottery
hide
v
t
e
NBA drafts
Draft lottery
Draft Combine
Eligibility
Territorial picks
First overall picks
High school draftees
Undrafted players
Supreme Court case
WNBA draft
1976 ABA Dispersal Draft
1940s
1947 1948 1949
1950s
1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959
1960s
1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969
1970s
1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979
1980s
1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989
1990s
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999
2000s
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
2010s
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Expansion drafts
1961
1966
1967
1968
1970
1974
1980
1988
1989
1995
2004
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=NBA_draft_lottery&oldid=842041136"
Categories:
National Basketball Association draft
Recurring events established in 1985
Hidden categories:
All articles with dead external links
Articles with dead external links from October 2010
Articles with hCards
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Français
中文
Edit links
This page was last edited on 19 May 2018, at 20:39.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

attrs: class href

values: mw-jump-link #mw-head

values: mw-jump-link #p-search

value: b

attrs: href class title

values:
/wiki/NBA_Playoffs
mw-redirect
NBA Playoffs

values:
/wiki/Eligibility_for_the_NBA_Draft
mw-redirect
Eligibility for the NBA Draft

value: p

attrs: role tabindex class

values: button 0 togglelink

values: Edit section: Before 1985: Territorial picks and coin flip

values: Edit section: 1985–1989: Early lottery system

values: Edit section: Since 1990: Weighted lottery system

values:
headerSort
0
columnheader button
Sort ascending

values:
/wiki/New_Jersey_Nets
mw-redirect
New Jersey Nets

values:
/wiki/2006_NBA_Draft#Draft_Lottery
mw-redirect
2006 NBA Draft

values:
/wiki/2007_NBA_Draft#Draft_Lottery
mw-redirect
2007 NBA Draft

values:
/wiki/2008_NBA_Draft#Draft_Lottery
mw-redirect
2008 NBA Draft

values:
/wiki/2009_NBA_Draft#Draft_Lottery
mw-redirect
2009 NBA Draft

values:
/wiki/2010_NBA_Draft#Draft_Lottery
mw-redirect
2010 NBA Draft

values:
/wiki/2011_NBA_Draft#Draft_lottery
mw-redirect
2011 NBA Draft

values:
/wiki/New_Orleans_Hornets
mw-redirect
New Orleans Hornets

values:
reflist mw-references-wrap
list-style-type: lower-alpha;

values: -moz-column-width: 30em; -webkit-column-width: 30em; column-width: 30em; list-style-type: decimal;

values:
nofollow
http://www.nba.com/
external text

values: List of National Basketball Association undrafted players

values: Haywood v. National Basketball Association

values:
*_Draft_lottery
*_Draft_Combine
*_Eligibility
*_Territorial_picks
*_First_overall_picks
*_High_school_draftees
*_Undrafted_players
*_Supreme_Court_case
*_WNBA_draft
*_1976_ABA_Dispersal_Draft

values: border-spacing: 0px; text-align:left;width:auto; margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto;

values: nowraplinks hlist collapsible autocollapse navbox-inner mw-collapsible mw-made-collapsible

values: Category:National Basketball Association draft

values: Category:Recurring events established in 1985

values: Category:All articles with dead external links

values: Category:Articles with dead external links from October 2010

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: You are encouraged to create an account and log in; however, it is not mandatory

values: You're encouraged to log in; however, it's not mandatory. [ctrl-alt-o]

values:
/wiki/NBA_draft_lottery
View the content page [ctrl-alt-c]
c

values: Discussion about the content page [ctrl-alt-t]

values: portal navigation p-navigation p-navigation-label

values: Guidance on how to use and edit Wikipedia

values: About the project, what you can do, where to find things

values: A list of recent changes in the wiki [ctrl-alt-r]

values: portal navigation p-interaction p-interaction-label

values: List of all English Wikipedia pages containing links to this page [ctrl-alt-j]

values: Recent changes in pages linked from this page [ctrl-alt-k]

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:File_Upload_Wizard
Upload files [ctrl-alt-u]
u

values: A list of all special pages [ctrl-alt-q]

values: Permanent link to this revision of the page

values: Link to connected data repository item [ctrl-alt-g]

values: Printable version of this page [ctrl-alt-p]

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-NBA_draft_lottery rootpage-NBA_draft_lottery skin-vector action-view


text:
Act of Parliament
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (February 2011) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
Acts of Parliament, also called primary legislation, are statutes passed by a parliament (legislature).[1] Act of the Oireachtas is an equivalent term used in the Republic of Ireland where the legislature is commonly known by its Irish name, Oireachtas.[citation needed] It is also comparable to an Act of Congress in the United States.[2]
Contents
[hide]
1 Bills
2 Procedure
2.1 Australia
2.2 Canada
2.3 India
2.4 Ireland
2.5 New Zealand
2.6 United Kingdom
2.6.1 United Kingdom Parliament
2.6.2 National Assembly for Wales
2.6.3 Northern Ireland Assembly
2.6.4 Scottish Parliament
2.7 Singapore
3 Titles and citation of Acts
4 See also
5 References
6 External links
Bills[edit]
A draft Act of Parliament is known as a bill.
In territories with a Westminster system, most bills that have any possibility of becoming law are introduced into parliament by the government. This will usually happen following the publication of a "white paper", setting out the issues and the way in which the proposed new law is intended to deal with them. A bill may also be introduced into parliament without formal government backing; this is known as a private member's bill.
In territories with a multicameral parliament, most bills may be first introduced in any chamber. However, certain types of legislation are required, either by constitutional convention or by law, to be introduced into a specific chamber. For example, bills imposing a tax, or involving public expenditure, are introduced into the House of Commons in the United Kingdom, Canada's House of Commons and Ireland's Dáil as a matter of law. Conversely, bills proposed by the Law Commission and consolidation bills traditionally start in the House of Lords.
Once introduced, a bill must go through a number of stages before it can become law. In theory, this allows the bill's provisions to be debated in detail, and for amendments to the original bill to also be introduced, debated, and agreed to.
In bicameral parliaments, a bill that has been approved by the chamber into which it was introduced then sends the bill to the other chamber. Broadly speaking, each chamber must separately agree to the same version of the bill. Finally, the approved bill receives assent; in most territories this is merely a formality, and is often a function exercised by the head of state.
In some countries, such as in Spain and Portugal, the term for a bill differs depending on whether it is initiated by the government (when it is known as a "project"), or by the Parliament (a "proposition", i.e., a private member's bill).
Procedure[edit]
Australia[edit]
In Australia, the bill passes through the following stages:
First reading: This stage is a mere formality, it involves the reading of the title of the proposed bill and distribution of the bill to members of parliament
Second reading: As in the UK, the stage involves a debate on the general principles of the bill and is followed by a vote. Again, the second reading of a Government bill is usually approved. A defeat for a Government bill on this reading signifies a major loss. If the bill is read a second time, it is then considered in detail
Consideration in detail: This usually takes place on the floor of the House. Generally, committees sit on the floor of the House and consider the bill in detail.
Third reading: A debate on the final text of the bill, as amended. Very rarely do debates occur during this stage.
Passage: The bill is then sent to the other House (to the Senate, if it originated in the House of Representatives; to the House of Representatives, if it is a Senate bill), which may amend it. If the other House amends the bill, the bill and amendments are posted back to the original House for a further stage. The State of Queensland's Parliament is unicameral and skips this and the rest of the stages.
Consideration of Senate/Representatives amendments: The House in which the bill originated considers the amendments made in the other House. It may agree to them, amend them, propose other amendments in lieu, or reject them. However, the Senate may not amend money bills, though it can "request" the House to make amendments. A bill may pass backwards and forwards several times at this stage, as each House amends or rejects changes proposed by the other. If each House insists on disagreeing with the other, the Bill is lost.
Disagreement between the Houses: Often, when a bill cannot be passed in the same form by both Houses, it is "laid aside", i.e. abandoned. There is also a special constitutional procedure allowing the passage of the bill without the separate agreement of both houses. If the House twice passes the same bill, and the Senate twice fails to pass that bill (either through rejection or through the passage of unacceptable amendments), then the Governor-General may dissolve both Houses of Parliament simultaneously and call an election for the entire Parliament. This is called a double dissolution. After the election, if the House again passes the bill, but the deadlock between the Houses persists, then the Governor-General may convene a joint sitting of both Houses, where a final decision will be taken on the bill. Although the House and the Senate sit as a single body, bills passed at a joint sitting are treated as if they had been passed by each chamber separately. The procedure only applies if the bill originated in the House of Representatives. Six double dissolutions have occurred, though a joint sitting was only held once, in 1974.
The bill is sent to the viceroy (the Governor-General for the Commonwealth; the Governor for a State; the Administrator for a Territory) for the royal assent. Certain bills must be reserved by the viceroy for the Queen's personal assent. Acts in the A.C.T. do not require this step.
Canada[edit]
In Canada, the bill passes through the following stages:
First reading: This stage is a mere formality.
Second reading: As in the UK, the stage involves a debate on the general principles of the bill and is followed by a vote. Again, the second reading of a government bill is usually approved. A defeat for a Government bill on this reading signifies a major loss. If the bill is read a second time, then it progresses to the committee stage.
Committee stage: This usually takes place in a standing committee of the Commons or Senate.
Standing committee: The standing committee is a permanent one; each committee deals with bills in specific subject areas. Canada's standing committees are similar to the UK's select committees.
Special committee: A committee established for a particular purpose, be it the examination of a bill or a particular issue.
Legislative committee: Similar to a special committee in that it is established for the consideration of a particular bill. The chairmanship is determined by the Speaker, rather than elected by the members of the committee. Not used in the Senate.
Committee of the Whole: The whole house sits as a committee in the House of Commons or Senate. Most often used to consider appropriation bills, but can be used to consider any bill.
The committee considers each clause of the bill, and may make amendments to it. Significant amendments may be made at committee stage. In some cases, whole groups of clauses are inserted or removed. However, if the Government holds a majority, almost all the amendments which are agreed to in committee will have been tabled by the Government to correct deficiencies in the bill or to enact changes to policy made since the bill was introduced (or, in some cases, to import material which was not ready when the bill was presented).
Report stage: this takes place on the floor of the appropriate chamber, and allows the House or Senate to approve amendments made in committee, or to propose new ones.
Third reading: A debate on the final text of the bill, as amended.
Passage: The bill is then sent to the other House (to the Senate, if it originated in the House of Commons; to the Commons, if it is a Senate bill), where it will face a virtually identical process. If the other House amends the bill, the bill and amendments are sent back to the original House for a further stage.
Consideration of Senate/Commons amendments: The House in which the bill originated considers the amendments made in the other House. It may agree to them, amend them, propose other amendments in lieu or reject them. If each House insists on disagreeing with the other, the Bill is lost.
Disagreement between the Houses: There is no specific procedure under which the Senate's disagreement can be overruled by the Commons. The Senate's rejection is absolute.
The debate on each stage is actually debate on a specific motion. For the first reading, there is no debate. For the second reading, the motion is "That this bill be now read a second time and be referred to [name of committee]" and for third reading "That this bill be now read a third time and pass." In the Committee stage, each clause is called and motions for amendments to these clauses, or that the clause stand part of the bill are made. In the Report stage, the debate is on the motions for specific amendments.
Once a bill has passed both Houses in an identical form, it receives final, formal examination by the Governor General, who gives it the royal assent. Although the Governor General can refuse to assent a bill or reserve the bill for the Queen at this stage, this power has never been exercised.[3]
Bills being reviewed by Parliament are assigned numbers: 2 to 200 for government bills, 201 to 1000 for private member's bills, and 1001 up for private bills. They are preceded by C- if they originate in the House of Commons, or S- if they originate in the Senate. For example, Bill C-250 was a private member's bill introduced in the House. Bills C-1 and S-1 are pro forma bills, and are introduced at the beginning of each session in order to assert the right of each Chamber to manage its own affairs. They are introduced and read a first time, and then are dropped from the Order Paper.
See also: List of Acts of Parliament of Canada
India[edit]
Main article: Lawmaking procedure in India
In the Parliament of India, every bill passes through following stages before it becomes an Act of Parliament of India:[4]
First reading - introduction stage: Any member, or member-in-charge of the bill seeks the leave of the house to introduce a bill. If the bill is an important one, the minister may make a brief speech, stating its main features.
Second reading - discussion stage: This stage consists of consideration of the bill and its provisions.
Third reading - voting stage: This stage is confined only to arguments either in support of the bill or for its rejection as a whole, without referring to its details. After the bill is passed, it is sent to the other house.
Bill in the other house (Rajya Sabha): After a bill, other than a money bill, is transmitted to the other house, it goes through all the stages in that house as that in the first house. But if the bill passed by one house is amended by the other house, it goes back to the originating house.
President's approval: When a bill is passed by both the houses, it is sent to the President for his approval. The President can assent or withhold his assent to a bill or he can return a bill, other than a money bill. If the President gives his assent, the bill is published in The Gazette of India[5] and becomes an Act from the date of his assent. If he withholds his assent, the bill is dropped, which is known as pocket veto. The pocket veto is not written in the constitution and has only been exercised once by President Zail Singh: in 1986, over the postal act where the government wanted to open postal letters without warrant. If the president returns it for reconsideration, the Parliament must do so, but if it is passed again and returned to him, he must give his assent to it.[6]
Ireland[edit]
In the Irish Parliament, the Oireachtas, bills pass through the following stages:[7] Bills may be initiated in either the Dáil or the Seanad, and must pass both houses.
First stage - Private members must seek the permission of the house to introduce a bill. Government bills do not require approval and are therefore introduced at the second stage.
Second stage – this involves a discussion of the general principle of the bill. It is introduced by the sponsoring minister (or in the case of a private member’s bill, by the member) and is followed by contributions from the floor of the house. Finally the debate is brought to a conclusion by voting on the proposal “that the bill now be read a second time”.
Third stage, commonly referred to as the Committee Stage. This involves section by section scrutiny of the bill and any amendments which have been tabled. In the Dáil this usually takes place in a committee room and will involve examination by one of the select committees. In the Seanad, this stage takes place in the chamber. The Seanad may only make recommendations rather than amendments, in the case of a money bill.
Fourth stage, commonly referred to as the Report Stage. At this point, a version of the bill incorporating any changes made at the Committee Stage is printed for consideration. In both houses, this stage is taken on the floor of the chamber. Amendments may be considered at this stage but must arise from matters discussed or changes made at the Committee Stage.
Fifth stage: in practice this is a formality, taken with the fourth stage and referred to as the ‘Report and Final Stage’.
Passage in the other house: the same stages are repeated in the other house and the bill is then deemed to have been passed, except that any bill initiated in the Dáil and amended by the Seanad must return to the Dáil for final consideration.
Signature: once the bill has passed both houses it is sent to the President for signature. The signed copy is the enrolled in the Office of the Supreme Court.
New Zealand[edit]
In New Zealand, the bill passes through the following stages:
First reading: MPs debate and vote on the bill. If a bill is approved, it passes on to the committee stage.
Select committee stage: The bill is considered by a Select Committee, which scrutinises the bill in detail and hears public submissions on the matter. The Committee may recommend amendments to the bill.
Second reading: The general principles of the bill are debated, and a vote is held. If the bill is approved, it is put before a Committee of the House.
Committee of the House: The bill is debated and voted on, clause by clause, by the whole House sitting as a committee.
Third reading: Summarising arguments are made, and a final vote is taken. If the bill is approved, it is passed to the Governor-General for royal assent. New Zealand has no upper house, and so no approval is necessary.
United Kingdom[edit]
United Kingdom Parliament[edit]
Main article: Acts of Parliament in the United Kingdom
A graphic representation of the legislative procedure in the United Kingdom.
A draft piece of legislation is called a bill, when this is passed by Parliament it becomes an Act and part of statute law. There are two types of bill and Act, public and private. Public Acts apply to the whole of the UK or a number of its constituent countries — England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Private Acts are local and personal in their effect, giving special powers to bodies such as local authorities or making exceptions to the law in particular geographic areas.[8]
In the United Kingdom Parliament, each bill passes through the following stages:
Pre-legislative scrutiny: Not undertaken for all bills; usually a joint committee of both houses will review a bill and vote on amendments that the government can either accept or reject. The report from this stage can be influential in later stages as rejected recommendations from the committee are revived to be voted on.
First reading: This is a formality; no vote occurs. The Bill is presented and ordered to be printed and, in the case of private members' bills, a date is set for second reading.
Second reading: A debate on the general principles of the bill is followed by a vote.
Committee stage: This usually takes place in a public bill committee[9] in the Commons and on the Floor of the House in the Lords. The committee considers each clause of the bill, and may make amendments to it.
Consideration (or report) stage: this takes place on the floor of the House, and is a further opportunity to amend the bill. Unlike committee stage, the House need not consider every clause of the bill, only those to which amendments have been tabled.
Third reading: a debate on the final text of the bill, as amended in the House of Lords. Further amendments may be tabled at this stage.
Passage: The bill is then sent to the other House (to the Lords, if it originated in the Commons; to the Commons, if it is a Lords bill), which may amend it.
Consideration of Lords/Commons amendments: The House in which the bill originated considers the amendments made in the other House.
Royal assent: the bill is passed with any amendments and becomes an act of parliament.
National Assembly for Wales[edit]
Main article: Act of the National Assembly for Wales
Northern Ireland Assembly[edit]
Main article: Act of the Northern Ireland Assembly
Scottish Parliament[edit]
Main article: Act of the Scottish Parliament
In the Scottish Parliament,[10] bills pass through the following stages:
Introduction: The Bill is introduced to the Parliament together with its accompanying documents — Explanatory Notes, a Policy Memorandum setting out the policy underlying the Bill and a Financial Memorandum setting out the costs and savings associated with it. Statements from the Presiding Officer and the member in charge of the Bill are also lodged, indicating whether the Bill is within the legislative competence of the Parliament.
Stage one: The Bill is considered by one or more of the subject Committees of the Parliament, which normally take evidence from the bill's promoter and other interested parties before reporting to the Parliament on the principles of the Bill. Other Committees, notably the Finance and Subordinate Legislation Committees, may also feed in at this stage. The report from the Committee is followed by a debate in the full Parliament.
Stage two: The Bill returns to the subject Committee where it is subject to line-by-line scrutiny and amendment. This is similar to the Committee Stage in the UK Parliament.
Stage three: The Bill as amended by the Committee returns to the full Parliament. There is a further opportunity for amendment, followed by a debate on the whole Bill, at the end of which the Parliament decides whether to pass the Bill.
Royal assent: After the Bill has been passed, the Presiding Officer submits it to Her Majesty for royal assent. However he cannot do so until a 4-week period has elapsed during which the Law Officers of the Scottish Executive or UK Government can refer the Bill to the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom for a ruling on whether the Bill is within the powers of the Parliament.
There are special procedures for emergency bills, member's bills (similar to private member's bills in the UK Parliament), committee bills, and private bills.
Singapore[edit]
In Singapore, the bill passes through these certain stages before becoming into an Act of Parliament.
First Reading: The bill is introduced to the government, usually by the members of parliament. The unicameral parliament will then discuss the bill, followed by a vote. Voting must be at least 1/2 aye for non-controversial bills and 2/3 aye for controversial ones. If the bill passes the vote it will proceed to the second reading.
Second Reading: In this stage, the bill is further discussed and put to a second vote. If more than half of the votes are aye the bill proceeds to the select committee.
Select Committee: The select committee consists of people not only from the parliaments, but also the people who could be affected by the bill is passed into law. This is to ensure equity and that the bill is fair for all. If the Bill is in favor, it will proceed to the third reading.
Third Reading: After the select committee has discussed and are in favor of the bill, they will put it to a vote. At this juncture, if the votes are more than 1/2 aye, it will be sent to the President of Singapore, currently Tony Tan. This is known as President Assent.
President Assent: The president must give permission in order for the bill to be passed. If he approves it, it will become a statute passed down by the members of parliament which is called an Act of Parliament.
Titles and citation of Acts[edit]
Acts passed by the Parliament of England did not originally have titles, and could only be formally cited by reference to the parliamentary session in which they were passed, with each individual Act being identified by year and chapter number. Descriptive titles began to be added to the enrolled Acts by the official clerks, as a reference aid; over time, titles came to be included within the text of each bill. Since the mid-nineteenth century, it has also become common practice for Acts to have a short title, as a convenient alternative to the sometimes lengthy main titles. The Short Titles Act 1892, and its replacement the Short Titles Act 1896, gave short titles to many Acts which previously lacked them.
The numerical citation of Acts has also changed over time. The original method was based on the regnal year(s) in which the relevant parliament session met. This has been replaced in most territories by simple reference to the calendar year, with the first Act passed being chapter 1, and so on.
In the United Kingdom, legislation is referenced by year and chapter number. Each act is numbered consecutively based on the date they received royal assent. for example the 43nd act passed in 1980 would be 1980 Chapter 43. The full reference includes the title and would be The Magistrate's Court Act 1980 C. 43.[11]
Until the 1980s, Acts of the Australian state of Victoria were numbered in a continuous sequence from 1857; thus the Age of Majority Act 1977 was No. 9075 of 1977.
See also[edit]
Act of Congress
Legislative act
Halsbury's Statutes
List of Acts of Parliament in the United Kingdom
Table of contents
References[edit]
Jump up ^ Gillespie, Alisdair (18 April 2013). The English Legal System. Oxford University Press. pp. 23–25. ISBN 978-0-19-965709-4.
Jump up ^ "Legislation", International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, Thomson Gale, 2008, retrieved 19 November 2016
Jump up ^ Smith, Jennifer. Democracy and the Canadian House of Commons at the millennium, Canadian Public Administration, Jan 1, 1999, Vol. 42, No. 4 (Winter 1999), p. 398.
Jump up ^ "HOW A BILL BECOMES AN ACT". parliamentofindia.nic.in. Retrieved 24 December 2013.
Jump up ^ "Amendments to Sebi Act gets Presidential assent". PTI. 18 Sep 2013. Retrieved 23 September 2013. It has now been published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part-II, Section-1, dated the 13th September 2013 as Act No. 22 of 2013
Jump up ^ Gupta, V. P. (26 Aug 2002). "The President’s role". Times of India. Retrieved 4 January 2012.
Jump up ^ "The Role of the Houses of the Oireachtas in the Scrutiny of Legislation" (PDF). Retrieved 22 January 2016.
Jump up ^ p. 190, How Parliament Works, 6th edition, Robert Rogers and Rhodri Walters, Pearson Longman, 2006
Jump up ^ Levy, Jessica, Public Bill Committees: An Assessment Scrutiny Sought; Scrutiny Gained, Parliamentary Affairs, Vol. 63, No. 3 (Jul 2010), p. 534.
Jump up ^ Mitchell, James. The Narcissism of Small Differences: Scotland and Westminster, Parliamentary Affairs, Jan 1, 2010, Vol. 63, No. 1 (Jan 2010), p. 98.
Jump up ^ [legislation.gov.uk legislation.gov.uk] Check |url= value (help). Missing or empty |title= (help)
General
www.publications.parliament.uk
External links[edit]
Acts of Parliament and statutory instruments are available free on-line under Crown copyright terms from the National Archives (legislation.gov.uk).
Parliamentary Stages of a Government Bill (pdf) from the House of Commons Information Office.
Acts of the Commonwealth Parliament of Australia: ComLaw.gov.au
[hide]
v
t
e
Law
Core subjects
Administrative law
Constitutional law
Contract
Criminal law
Deed
Equity
Evidence
International law
Law of obligations
Procedure
Civil
Criminal
Property law
Public law
Restitution
Statutory law
Tort
Other subjects
Agricultural law
Aviation law
Banking law
Bankruptcy
Commercial law
Competition law
Conflict of laws
Construction law
Consumer protection
Corporate law
Cyberlaw
Election law
Energy law
Entertainment law
Environmental law
Family law
Financial regulation
Health law
Immigration law
Intellectual property
International criminal law
International human rights
International slavery laws
Labour
Law of war
Legal archaeology
Legal fiction
Maritime law
Media law
Military law
Probate
Estate
Will and testament
Product liability
Public international law
Space law
Sports law
Tax law
Transport law
Trust law
Women in law
Sources of law
Charter
Constitution
Custom
Divine right
Human rights
Natural and legal rights
Case law
Precedent
Law making
Ballot measure
Codification
Decree
Edict
Executive order
Proclamation
Legislation
Delegated legislation
Regulation
Rulemaking
Promulgation
Repeal
Treaty
Statutory law
Statute
Act of Parliament
Act of Congress (US)
Legal systems
Civil law
Common law
Chinese law
Legal pluralism
Religious law
Canon law
Hindu law
Jain law
Jewish law
Sharia
Roman law
Socialist law
Statutory law
Xeer
Yassa
Legal theory
Critical legal studies
Comparative law
Feminist
Law and economics
Legal formalism
History
Natural law
International legal theory
Principle of legality
Rule of law
Sociology
Jurisprudence
Adjudication
Administration of justice
Criminal justice
Court-martial
Dispute resolution
Fiqh
Lawsuit/Litigation
Legal opinion
Legal remedy
Judge
Justice of the peace
Magistrate
Judgment
Judicial review
Jurisdiction
Jury
Justice
Practice of law
Attorney
Barrister
Counsel
Lawyer
Legal representation
Prosecutor
Solicitor
Question of fact
Question of law
Trial
Trial advocacy
Trier of fact
Verdict
Legal institutions
Bureaucracy
The bar
The bench
Civil society
Court
Election commission
Executive
Judiciary
Law enforcement
Legal education
Law school
Legislature
Military
Police
Political party
Tribunal
Category
Index
Outline
Portal
Authority control
NDL: 00945659
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Act_of_Parliament&oldid=797884873"
Categories:
Westminster system
Statutory law
Hidden categories:
Pages with citations lacking titles
Pages with citations having bare URLs
Pages with URL errors
Articles needing additional references from February 2011
All articles needing additional references
Articles containing Irish-language text
All articles with unsourced statements
Articles with unsourced statements from November 2016
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
Čeština
Cymraeg
Deutsch
Gàidhlig
한국어
Հայերեն
Bahasa Indonesia
Italiano
Basa Jawa
Magyar
Bahasa Melayu
Nederlands
日本語
Polski
Português
Scots
Simple English
தமிழ்
ไทย
Tiếng Việt
中文
Edit links
This page was last edited on 29 August 2017, at 18:50.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

key: html

type: local

value: div

attrs: id class

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

attrs: id class style

value: a

attrs: id class lang

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

values: jump-to-nav mw-jump

value: img

attrs: alt src width height srcset data-file-width data-file-height

attrs: href class

value: td

attrs: href title

values: Help:Introduction to referencing with Wiki Markup/1

value: span

value: i

value: small

values: plainlinks metadata ambox ambox-content ambox-Refimprove

values:
/wiki/Primary_legislation
mw-redirect
Primary legislation

values: This claim needs references to reliable sources. (November 2016)

values:
noprint Inline-Template Template-Fact
white-space:nowrap;

values:
/wiki/Bill_(proposed_law)
mw-redirect
Bill (proposed law)

values: Constitutional convention (political custom)

values:
/wiki/Canadian_House_of_Commons
mw-redirect
Canadian House of Commons

values: Joint Sitting of the Australian Parliament of 1974

values:
/wiki/First_reading
mw-redirect
First reading

values:
/wiki/Second_reading
mw-redirect
Second reading

values:
/wiki/Canadian_senate
mw-redirect
Canadian senate

values:
/wiki/Special_committee
mw-redirect
Special committee

values:
/wiki/Legislative_committee
mw-redirect
Legislative committee

values: Speaker of the Canadian House of Commons

values:
/wiki/Committee_of_the_Whole
mw-redirect
Committee of the Whole

values:
/wiki/Appropriation_bills
mw-redirect
Appropriation bills

values:
/wiki/Report_stage
mw-redirect
Report stage

values:
/wiki/Third_reading
mw-redirect
Third reading

values: Acts of Parliament in the United Kingdom

attrs: alt src width height class srcset data-file-width data-file-height

values: Edit section: National Assembly for Wales

values:
/wiki/Tony_Tan_Keng_Yam
mw-redirect
Tony Tan Keng Yam

values: Edit section: Titles and citation of Acts

values:
/wiki/Victoria_(state)
mw-redirect
Victoria (state)

values: Age of Majority Act 1977 (page does not exist)

values:
/wiki/Legislative_act
mw-redirect
Legislative act

values:
/wiki/National_Archives
mw-redirect
National Archives

values:
nofollow
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/
external text

values:
/wiki/Commercial_law
mw-redirect
Commercial law

values:
/wiki/Maritime_law
mw-redirect
Maritime law

values:
/wiki/Executive_order_(disambiguation)
mw-disambig
Executive order (disambiguation)

values:
/wiki/Delegated_legislation
mw-redirect
Delegated legislation

values:
/wiki/Legal_theory
mw-redirect
Legal theory

values:
/wiki/International_legal_theory
mw-redirect
International legal theory

values:
/wiki/Principle_of_legality
mw-redirect
Principle of legality

values:
/wiki/Legal_representation
mw-redirect
Legal representation

values:
/wiki/Question_of_fact
mw-redirect
Question of fact

values:
navbox-abovebelow hlist
2
text-align:center;

values: nowraplinks collapsible autocollapse navbox-inner

values: Category:Pages with citations lacking titles

values: Category:Pages with citations having bare URLs

values: Category:Articles needing additional references from February 2011

values: Category:All articles needing additional references

values: Category:Articles containing Irish-language text

values: Category:All articles with unsourced statements

values: Category:Articles with unsourced statements from November 2016

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: You are encouraged to create an account and log in; however, it is not mandatory

values:
/wiki/Act_of_Parliament
View the content page [ctrl-alt-c]
c

values: p-namespaces navigation vectorTabs p-namespaces-label

values:
p-variants
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-variants-label

values: Past revisions of this page [ctrl-alt-h]

values: p-views navigation vectorTabs p-views-label

values:
p-cactions
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-cactions-label

values:
mw-wiki-logo
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page

values:
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page [ctrl-alt-z]
z

values: Featured content – the best of Wikipedia

values: Find background information on current events

values:
/wiki/Special:Random
Load a random article [ctrl-alt-x]
x

values:
uls-settings-trigger
Language settings
0
button
true

values: 의회제정법 – Korean

values: Հայաստանի Հանրապետության օրենք – Armenian

values:
https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ustawa
Ustawa – Polish
pl
pl
interlanguage-link-target

values: ஆளும் மன்றச் செய்யுள் – Tamil

values: พระราชบัญญัติ – Thai

values: /static/images/wikimedia-button-1.5x.png 1.5x, /static/images/wikimedia-button-2x.png 2x

values: /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_132x47.png 1.5x, /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_176x62.png 2x

values:
suggestions
display: none; font-size: 13px;

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-Act_of_Parliament rootpage-Act_of_Parliament skin-vector action-view