House of Commons
Political and Constitutional
Reform Committee
Rules of Royal
Succession:
Government Response
to the Committee’s
Eleventh Report of
Session 2010–12
First Special Report of Session 2012–
13
Ordered by the House of Commons
to be printed 6 September 2012
HC 586
Published on 10 September 2012
by authority of the House of Commons
London: The Stationery Office Limited
£0.00
The Political and Constitutional Reform Committee
The Political and Constitutional Reform Committee is appointed by the House of
Commons to consider political and constitutional reform.
Current membership
Mr Graham Allen MP (Labour, Nottingham North) (Chair)
Mr Christopher Chope MP (Conservative, Christchurch)
Paul Flynn MP (Labour, Newport West)
Sheila Gilmore MP (Labour, Edinburgh East)
Andrew Griffiths MP (Conservative, Burton)
Fabian Hamilton MP, (Labour, Leeds North East)
Simon Hart MP (Conservative, Camarthen West and South Pembrokeshire)
Tristram Hunt MP (Labour, Stoke on Trent Central)
Mrs Eleanor Laing MP (Conservative, Epping Forest)
Mr Andrew Turner MP (Conservative, Isle of Wight)
Stephen Williams MP (Liberal Democrat, Bristol West)
Powers
The Committee’s powers are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders,
principally in Temporary Standing Order (Political and Constitutional Reform
Committee). These are available on the Internet via
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmstords.htm.
Publication
The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery
Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press
notices) are on the internet at www.parliament.uk/pcrc. A list of Reports of the
Committee in the present Parliament is at the back of this volume.
The Reports of the Committee, the formal minutes relating to that report, oral
evidence taken and some or all written evidence are available in a printed
volume.
Additional written evidence may be published on the internet only.
Committee staff
The current staff of the Committee are Joanna Dodd (Clerk), Helen Kinghorn
(Legal Specialist), Lorna Horton (Inquiry Manager), Louise Glen (Senior
Committee Assistant), Jim Lawford (Committee Assistant) and Jessica BridgesPalmer (Media Officer).
Contacts
All correspondence should be addressed to the Clerk of the Political and
Constitutional Reform Committee, House of Commons, 7 Millbank, London
SW1P 3JA. The telephone number for general enquiries is 020 7219 6287; the
Committee’s email address is [email protected].
Rules of Royal Succession: Government Response
1
Special Report
The Political and Constitutional Reform Committee published its Eleventh Report of
Session 2010-12, Rules of Royal Succession on 7 December 2011, as House of Commons
Paper HC 1615. The Government Response to this Report was received on 15 August 2012
and is published below.
Appendix: Government Response
Letter from Mark Harper MP, Minister for Political and Constitutional
Reform
The Government is grateful to the Political and Constitutional Reform Committee for
its report on Rules of Royal Succession, published on 1 December 2011.
This Government fully accepts that there are provisions in the laws on succession which
could be discriminatory and do not reflect the values we hold today as a society. The UK
Government is working with all of the other countries of which Her Majesty is also
Head of State to put in place succession laws which are fit for the 21st century; and the
sixteen Commonwealth realms have agreed in principle that we should modernise the
rules of royal succession. The UK legislation will be commenced only when the
necessary arrangements are in place in all sixteen Commonwealth Realms.
The proposed changes would deal with the two aspects of Royal Succession which were
discussed with the Commonwealth Realms during the meeting in Perth, Australia on 28
October 2011 and also with the Royal Marriages Act 1772.
This letter addresses the Committee’s conclusions and concerns raised, in particular, in
paragraph 18 of the report.
Primogeniture and the aristocracy
As the Committee notes, the provisions in the proposal would end the system whereby a
male is preferred over a female in succession to the Throne. This reflects our belief that
gender should not be relevant in determining succession. The Committee may wish to
note that the change would apply to all children born on or after the date of the Perth
announcement on 28 October 2011 even if the birth takes place before the legislation is
passed.
The Government believes that there are differences between the rules regarding
hereditary peerages and the rules governing succession to the Crown. First, the Crown
does not become extinct if there are only female heirs. And second, the succession of the
elder daughter or her descendants is automatic in the rules governing succession to the
Crown.
2
Rules of Royal Succession: Government Response
Notwithstanding this, we entirely accept that the matter of hereditary peerages is of
public interest.
However, the Government has no plans to change the laws of succession with regard to
hereditary peerages. Changes to the law on succession to the Crown can be effected
without any change to the legitimate expectations of those in the line of succession.
Changes to the rules governing succession to hereditary titles would be far more
complicated to implement fairly. For this reason, we do not believe that changes to the
rules governing succession to the Crown should serve the purpose of addressing what is
quite a separate issue.
In addition, the Perth agreement between the Commonwealth Realms is limited to
removing the male bias in the line of succession and the bar on Catholic marriages. The
other Commonwealth Realms have also agreed to amend the Royal Marriages Act. The
Government feels that this agreement, which took some considerable time to negotiate,
precludes the addition of any other measures into legislation designed to effect these
changes.
Changes on hereditary peerages would only affect the United Kingdom and we do not
believe it to be appropriate for the legislation to deal with matters which affect the
Realms and others which do not.
Religion and establishment
The Government proposal would remove the discriminatory legal provision that
renders anyone who marries a Roman Catholic ineligible to succeed to the Crown. The
Government does not, however, believe that this raises questions about the future role of
the Sovereign in the Church of England. The proposed change would not allow a
Roman Catholic to accede to the Throne; it will simply remove the penalties for
marrying a Roman Catholic. In addition, those rules requiring a Sovereign to swear an
oath to maintain the Protestant religion would remain unchanged.
The Government is committed to the Church of England as the Established Church in
England, with the Sovereign as its Supreme Governor. We consider that the relationship
between the Church and State in England is an important part of our constitutional
framework that has evolved over the centuries; and have no current intention of
changing this position, unless it is something which the Church of England itself
requests.
Royal Marriages Act 1772
The Government proposal would also address the Royal Marriages Act 1772 which
makes a marriage void if any of the descendants of George II fail to obtain permission
prior to their marriage. We continue to accept that there is public interest in the
Rules of Royal Succession: Government Response
3
marriage of those close to the Crown requiring the Sovereign's consent. However, we
share the Committee's view that the scope of the 1772 Act now encompasses many
people, many of whom will be unaware that they are caught by the provisions of the Act,
and we also consider that the sanction of making a marriage void is disproportionate.
Our proposal will replace the Royal Marriages Act 1772 with a provision requiring the
consent of the Sovereign to the marriage of the first six in the line of succession; and
stating that if an eligible person marries without consent they will lose their place in the
line of succession. This provision would guarantee that the absence of the Sovereign's
permission would have no impact on the validity of their marriage.
Once again, please accept my thanks for the Committee’s Report. The Government
looks forward to introducing legislation once necessary arrangements are in place with
all sixteen Commonwealth Realms; and to the continued engagement of the Political
and Constitutional Reform Committee with this issue.