1. The sovereign’s throne is only used during state opening, by the monarch. It was designed by Augustus Pugin, the gothic revival architect responsible for much of the House of Lords’ interiors, on the instruction of the managing architect, Charles Barry.[1] On its unveiling, the Times described the throne as “the most striking point of beauty and splendour in an apartment overflowing with every form of elegance”.[2] It was based on the early 14th-century coronation chair in Westminster Abbey.[3] A second consort’s throne was created in 1901. It is almost identical to the sovereign’s throne but one inch shorter. It is kept at Houghton Hall in Norfolk, except when it is needed for state openings.[4]
  2. The cloth of estate sits above the throne. The current ‘cloth’ has no textile elements, but previous canopies for royal thrones in the House and elsewhere would have included cloth. The ‘cloth’ is made of intricately carved wood, with coats of arms, heraldic devices and national and chivalric symbols.[5] The canopy and throne represent the sovereign in Parliament, and therefore the ‘Companion to the standing orders and guide to the proceedings of the House of Lords’ states members should bow their heads to the cloth of estate on entering the chamber.[6] The earliest known record for a monarch’s cloth is an order placed in 1252 for Henry III’s palace at Woodstock.[7] George III ordered a new throne and a “rich crimson velvet” canopy to be made for his state opening at a cost of £110. It was “imposing enough to fulfil its prime purpose: to enhance the dignity of the crown and to represent adequately the symbolic presence of the monarch within Parliament”.[8]
  3. The woolsack is a wool-stuffed red cloth seat from which the lord speaker or their deputies preside over debates. Its status in the House was enshrined in the first standing orders in 1621.[9] When the House of Lords is sitting, the mace, the symbol of royal authority, is placed on the rear of the woolsack, behind the lord speaker.[10] To “keep dignity and order” members must not pass between the woolsack and any member who is speaking, or between the woolsack and the table.[11] If members wish to talk to each other while the House is sitting, they are not permitted to speak behind the woolsack and must retire to the Prince’s Chamber. Tradition has it that Edward III commanded that the lord chancellor should sit on a woolsack as a reminder that wool was then a principal source of the country’s revenue.[12] Over time, the wool stuffing had been gradually replaced by cheaper hair.[13] This was discovered in 1938 and the woolsack was restuffed with wool from the British Isles and Commonwealth nations, supplied by the International Wool Secretariat.[14]
  4. Two further woolsacks sit in the centre of the chamber. These are the judges’ woolsacks, which can be sat on by any member, but were previously used by judges when the House of Lords had a judicial function. Senior judges still occupy these seats at state opening.[15]
  5. The government and its supporters occupy the benches to the right-hand side of the throne, viewed from it. Privy counsellors sit on the bench nearest the bar (at the far end of the chamber from the throne).[16] It is known as the spiritual side of the House. This reflects an order of precedence set in the reign of Henry VIII.[17] In 1535, Henry VIII appointed Thomas Cromwell to be ‘vicegerent in spirituals’, holding “the powers of a supreme judge in causes ecclesiastical” following the break from Rome in 1534.[18] The House of Lords Precedence Act 1539 enshrined in law that Thomas Cromwell should sit at the monarch’s right hand, on the bench above the archbishop of Canterbury. The act also set the order of seating for other senior Church of England clergy as: the archbishops of Canterbury then York, followed by the bishops of London, Durham and Winchester, then other bishops according to their ‘ancienty’ (seniority).
  6. The position of vicegerent was effectively disestablished after Cromwell’s departure, but the seating arrangements codified at the time remain with the bishops’ benches.[19] The bishops retain their position on the first two benches nearest the throne on the spiritual side, with the two archbishops and the bishops of London, Durham and Winchester retaining their primacy and the sole right to speak from the bench at the front.[20] Other members can sit on the front bishops’ bench, but cannot contribute. In 2010 the creation of the coalition government led to overcrowding on the spiritual side.[21] A suggestion that the bishops move to the temporal side to make room for the Liberal Democrats to join the Conservatives on the government benches was rejected due to historical and legal precedent.
  7. Opposition parties sit on the temporal side of the chamber.[22] Privy counsellors sit on the front bench by the throne on the temporal side. Additional seating for members of any party or grouping is available below the bar on the temporal side, but members cannot speak from there.[23]
  8. Crossbench peers occupy the benches that sit across the width of the chamber and the benches nearest the bar on the spiritual side, except for the front bench nearest the bar, which is reserved for privy counsellors.[24] There is some accessible space just in front of the cross benches which any member with a need can occupy.
  9. Members can sit on the steps of the throne during a debate (including those who have not yet taken their seat or the oath and those on a leave of absence), but may not speak from them.[25] The steps of the throne are often used by members who wish to listen to a debate but not participate. The right to sit on the steps and observe extends to others too, including:
  • members who are disqualified from sitting or voting in the House due to holding a senior judicial position
  • hereditary peers who were excluded from the House after the House of Lords Act 1999
  • the eldest child (including adopted children) of a member, or the eldest son where the right was exercised before 27 March 2000
  • peers of Ireland
  • diocesan bishops in the Church of England who do not yet have seats in the House of Lords
  • retired bishops who have had seats in the House
  • former members who have retired or resigned under the House of Lords Reform Act 2014
  • privy counsellors
  • clerk of the crown in chancery
  • Black Rod and their deputy
  • the dean of Westminster[26]

1. On the steps of the throne

The practice of sitting on the steps of the throne is historically based on the eldest sons of hereditary peers gaining experience of the House ahead of inheriting their seats. Lord Curzon of Keddleston, nineteenth-century viceroy of India, and later leader of the House of Lords, quickly acclimatised to the House of Lords, according to his biographer, because of his time sitting on the steps watching debates as a boy.[27]

Memorably, in 1999 the Earl of Burford exercised his right to sit on the steps as the eldest son of the 14th Duke of St Albans for the third reading of the House of Lords Bill.[28] He stormed the chamber floor at the start of the debate, jumped on the woolsack and called on members to “vote this treason down” before being ejected by Black Rod. The incident is recorded in Hansard simply as ‘interruption’.[29] The bill subsequently passed.

After reform in 1999, the House of Lords Offices Committee recommended that every member’s eldest child, regardless of gender, should be able to sit on the steps of the throne.[30] The exception was that sons who had an older sister but had previously exercised the right could continue to do so.

In the debate on the committee report, female hereditary peer the Countess of Mar recounted her efforts to have her daughter be allowed to sit on the steps:

My lords, I take this opportunity to thank the committee for extending the rights of females to sit on the steps of the throne. Perhaps I may remind the noble lord that new incumbents will have far less of a battle than I had with the noble lord, Lord Denham—I see he has just taken his seat—when he was chief whip. When I sought to persuade him that my daughter, who is also my heir, should be allowed to sit on the steps of the throne, after a lot of excuses which did not stand up, he said that I might produce a son. I said that I could produce a certificate to prove that I could not and he finally gave way.[31]

The Countess of Mar’s daughter, Susan, reports sitting on the steps of the throne frequently.[32]

Sitting prime ministers can exercise the right to sit on the steps as privy counsellors. In 2017, then Prime Minister Theresa May observed the House of Lords debate on the bill to trigger article 50 for the UK to leave the EU.[33] She returned in May 2023 to watch members discuss the Illegal Migration Bill.[34]

It is rare for a prime minister to exercise this right, but there is precedent.[35] Clement Attlee watched the debate passing the Indian Independence Act in 1947. Edward Heath watched the debate on entry to the European Economic Community.[36] William Gladstone visited the House twice during debates on the contentious Irish Church Bill, and presumably sat on the steps.[37]

Baroness Falkender describes a number of privy counsellors, including the then prime minister, Harold Wilson, sitting on the steps of the throne for her introduction to the House of Lords.[38] Baroness Falkender was political secretary and adviser to Harold Wilson. John Major sat on the steps to watch the introduction of Lord Waddington, who had been chief whip and home secretary, and went on to be leader of the House of Lords.[39]

Prime ministers can also stand at the bar.[40] This is where Margaret Thatcher watched tributes on the retirement of Viscount Whitelaw as leader of the House of Lords, and where David Cameron watched tributes to Margaret Thatcher on her death.[41]

Recently, Charles Brougham, the new Lord Brougham and Vaux, sat on the steps of the throne shortly after the death of his father.[42] Although he was technically no longer permitted to sit there as he was not at that point the eldest son of a sitting member, he was allowed to stay by the House. In a self-governing chamber, there is sometimes room for flexibility.


Cover image: Copyright House of Lords 2022/photography by Annabel Moeller on Flickr. Numbering added by the House of Lords Library.

References

  1. UK Parliament, ‘The sovereign’s throne’, accessed 15 December 2023. Return to text
  2. Caroline Shenton, ‘Mr Barry’s War’, 2016, p 172. Return to text
  3. UK Parliament, ‘The Lords chamber’, accessed 15 December 2023. Return to text
  4. UK Parliament, ‘The sovereign’s throne’, accessed 15 December 2023. Return to text
  5. Alexandra Wedgwood, ‘The throne in the House of Lords and its setting’, Architectural History, 1984, vol 27, p 65. Return to text
  6. House of Lords, ‘Companion to the standing orders and guide to the proceedings of the House of Lords’, 2022, p 52. Return to text
  7. Hugh Roberts, ‘Royal thrones, 1760–1840’, Furniture History, 1989, vol 25, p 65. Return to text
  8. As above. Return to text
  9. UK Parliament, ‘The origin of the House of Lords’ standing orders’, 18 May 2021. Return to text
  10. UK Parliament, ‘Rules and traditions of Parliament’, accessed 15 December 2023. Return to text
  11. House of Lords, ‘Companion to the standing orders and guide to the proceedings of the House of Lords’, 2022, p 53. Return to text
  12. Robert Rogers and Rhodri Walters, ‘How Parliament Works’, 2015, p 5. Return to text
  13. UK Parliament, ‘Woolsack’, accessed 15 December 2023. Return to text
  14. UK Parliament, ‘The Lords chamber’, accessed 15 December 2023. Return to text
  15. UK Parliament, ‘Traditions of Parliament’, accessed 15 December 2023. Return to text
  16. House of Lords, ‘Companion to the standing orders and guide to proceedings of the House of Lords’, 2022, p 17. Return to text
  17. F Donald Logan, ‘Thomas Cromwell and the vicegerency in spirituals: A revisitation’, English Historical Review, vol 103, issue 408, pp 658–67. Return to text
  18. As above. Return to text
  19. As above. Return to text
  20. House of Lords, ‘Companion to the standing orders and guide to the proceedings of the House of Lords’, 2022, p 17. Return to text
  21. Sue Cameron, ‘Whitehall’s verdict on Coulson row: Full House’, Financial Times (£), 8 September 2010. Return to text
  22. House of Lords, ‘Companion to the standing orders and guide to the proceedings of the House of Lords’, 2022, p 17. Return to text
  23. As above. Return to text
  24. As above. Return to text
  25. As above. Return to text
  26. As above. Return to text
  27. David Gilmour, ‘Curzon: Imperial statesman’, 2019. Return to text
  28. BBC News, ‘One lord a-leaping’, 26 October 1999. Return to text
  29. HL Hansard, 26 October 1999, col 169. Return to text
  30. HL Hansard, 27 March 2000, cols 500–3. Return to text
  31. HL Hansard, 27 March 2000, cols 502–3. Return to text
  32. Suzie Mar, ‘Personal X account’, 19 June 2021. Return to text
  33. Oliver Wright, ‘May turns up to keep an eye on peers debating Article 50’, Times (£), 21 February 2017. Return to text
  34. House of Lords, ‘Official Flickr account’, 10 May 2023. Return to text
  35. The History of Parliament, ‘The prime minister in the House of Lords: Gladstone and the Irish Church bill, 1869’, 14 March 2017. Return to text
  36. Oliver Wright, ‘May turns up to keep an eye on peers debating Article 50’, Times (£), 21 February 2017. Return to text
  37. The History of Parliament, ‘The prime minister in the House of Lords: Gladstone and the Irish Church bill, 1869’, 14 March 2017. Return to text
  38. Linda McDougall, ‘Marcia Williams: The life and times of Baroness Falkender’, 1 June 2022, p 33. Return to text
  39. HL Hansard, 27 February 2017, col 565. Return to text
  40. Oliver Wright, ‘May turns up to keep an eye on peers debating Article 50’, Times (£), 21 February 2017. Return to text
  41. As above. Return to text
  42. Observed by House of Lords colleagues. Return to text