Amendment did not auto-apply

Scenario

You’ve selected some amendments, but some of them didn’t auto-apply. This can happen occasionally where Lawmaker doesn’t recognise a particular amendment and fails to auto-apply it to the bill. You will see a list of amendments that failed to apply in the Review right-hand panel when you open up the amended bill in the Editor.

If you cannot determine why the amendment failed auto-application, contact the Lawmaker team. They will investigate and assess whether this scenario should be included in the roadmap for a future release.

Error messages and what to do with them

The workaround will depend on the reason why the amendment failed to be auto-applied:

Can't apply amendment [#] because the page or line number is invalid. The amendments clause/schedule, page or line number information does not match the page-line information in the last published bill version. To resolve:
1. Open the amendment in a temporary list,
2. Correct the location information (Amendment Information r-h panel),
3. Save your changes,
4. Re-apply the amendment
Can't apply amendment [#]: The insertion of a new Part or Chapter at this point requires the new structure to be created manually. This amendment is ‘breaking’ the existing bill’s grouping level structure. To resolve:
1. Open the bill in the Editor
2. Manually restructure the bill by unwrapping and (re)wrapping grouping levels
3. When the grouping levels are correct, open the amendment in a temporary list and copy the new clause content:
  1. If you didn’t already insert the amendment’s grouping level:
    1. Place your cursor in the amendment's quoted structure
    2. Right-click > Copy content of quoted structure
  2. If you did manually insert the amendment’s grouping level:
    1. Place your cursor in the amendment’s quoted structure
    2. Click on the clause and select ‘section’ from the breadcrumb which will highlight the whole clause
    3. Use key board short cut CTRL + C to copy the new clause
4. Return to the bill in the Editor and paste the copied content in the correct location using keyboard short cut CTRL + V
Warning: amendment [#] is being inserted at the same location as another amendment. If you haven’t used sort codes to order amendments appearing at the same location, you will get this warning e.g. inserting paragraphs from different amendments at the same point in the bill. To resolve:
1. Check that the inserted paragraphs are in the correct order.
2. Alternatively, ensure amendments already have sort codes where they appear at the same location.
Can't apply amendment [#] because it overlaps with another amendment This is unlikely to occur for ‘as amended’ bills at the end of amending stages as it happens when the target location for an amendment is within provisions or text marked as deleted i.e. conflicting amendments. To resolve:
1. Either avoid conflicting amendments, or
2. Manually apply the amendments
Can't apply amendment x because the instruction isn't recognised or can't be handled this happens if it’s an amendment that is in the wrong format or a case Lawmaker doesn’t handle yet. Check the wording of the instruction is correct and change it if necessary. Otherwise it may be necessary to manually apply the changes. To manually apply amendments that are inserting new provisions:
1. Open the amendment in a temporary list,
2. Place your cursor in the amendment's quoted structure
3. Right-click > Copy content of quoted structure
4. Return to the bill in the Editor and paste the copied content in the correct location using keyboard short cut CTRL + V

Common amendment drafting pitfalls

Issue summary

Why is this an issue

How to resolve it

Full stop at the end of the instruction (typically seen in amendments drafted in a traditional LoDA)

NB Stand part motions SHOULD have a full stop at the end

As part of assessing how to apply an amendment, Lawmaker parses the instruction text and punctuation rules are an important part of determining the scope of amended text.

A full stop at the end of the instruction can confuse Lawmaker when it parses the instruction text.

Delete any rogue full-stops at the end of instructions

Amendment’s quoted structure indent level is incorrect (when inserting new provisions in the bill that are destined for insertion within a quoted structure in the bill itself)

Some scenarios when indent levels are important

If an amendment is inserting a new provision (e.g. subsection) into a quoted structure within the bill, the indent level of the amendment’s quoted structure should have an indent level of “1”.

If an amendment is inserting a new provision (e.g. a subsection) into the main body of the bill (i.e. not within a quoted structure), then the indent level should be left at the default “0”

To update the indent level of a quoted structure in an amendment:

Place cursor inside the amendment’s quoted structure
Right-click > Update quoted structure properties
Update indent level using the drop-down level

Amendment’s quoted structure is the wrong provision type according to the bill’s quoted structure document type

Typically found when amending provisions being inserted into enacted legislation of a different type from the bill e.g. inserting additional paragraphs into a Northern Ireland Order in Council.

Lawmaker uses schema validation to work out which element is valid at a particular insertion point so will fail trying to insert a subsection into a series of NI Order in Council paragraphs, even though they look the same.

The document type isn’t import to auto-apply (inline amendments automatically assigns all quoted structures “nia” rather than the true document type of the quoted structure that the provision was inserted into.

The important information for Lawmaker is that the provision being inserted is correct.

Simplest

Delete the amendment’s quoted structure and insert a new one with the correct document type and provisions.

You can use smart paste if you are comfortable using it to copy and paste the content of the original quoted structure into the new one to save typing the whole thing out

Location line isn’t correctly capitalised e.g.

“Long title” instead of “Long Title”, or

“Clause 1, page 1, line 1” instead of “Clause 1, Page 1, Line 1”

Lawmaker expects the location information to be in capitals

Stand part motion didn’t auto-apply

Wording is wrong; or

Missing full stop at the end

Stand part motions have been configured to work in auto-apply by using the entire phrase.

This means any typos, or different phrases will not work.

It also means that a full stop is mandatory for auto-apply to recognise it.

At least it will accept non-binary Members and Ministers which a positive step towards inclusivity.

Check the wording of the motion is exactly:

The Member listed below gives notice of [his / her / their] intention to oppose the question that [schedule / clause #] stand part of the Bill.

OR

The Chair gives notice of the Committee's intention to oppose the question that [schedule / clause #] stand part of the Bill.

OR

The Minister gives notice of [his / her / their] intention to oppose the question that [schedule / clause #] stand part of the Bill.