Publications / Guides

What is the debate on the ‘Address’?

Speaker of the House of Commons Sir Lindsay Hoyle MP in the Chamber, 9 September 2020. UK Parliament / Jessica Taylor
UK Parliament / Jessica Taylor

After the King's Speech has been delivered, each House must respond to it. This response takes the form of a 'humble Address' from the House to the King, thanking him for the Speech. The debate on this motion is properly called the 'Debate on the Address'. The debate lasts for several days in each House and provides an occasion for a wide-ranging and constitutionally significant discussion about the Government's policies and programme.

~

The debate on the Address - which is sometimes also referred to as the debate on the 'Loyal Address' - allows a wide-ranging debate on virtually any aspect of government policy. The debate ends when the motion to present the humble Address to the King is put to the House for a decision, in the normal way.

The motion to present the humble Address is amendable, but it may be amended only to add further text at the end of the original motion.

In the King’s Speech debate, the House of Commons and House of Lords debate their responses to the Speech. The debate lasts for several days in each House and provides an occasion for a wide-ranging and constitutionally significant debate on the Government's policies and programme.

The King’s Speech debate normally lasts for five or six sitting days in total. The House of Lords' debate is sometimes a day shorter than the Commons'.

The debate on the Address is Government business. The Government thus decides, each time, how many and which parliamentary days to allocate to it. The Government does not need to secure either House's agreement to a business motion in order to schedule the King's Speech debate, or to change the schedule which is initially announced.

In both Houses, the King's Speech debate normally starts on the day of the Speech.

Normally, the debate takes place on successive sitting days. However, the Government may decide to interrupt the debate at any point after the first day, schedule one or more days on which only non-King's Speech business is taken, and then resume the King's Speech debate. There may thus be more sitting days between the start and end of the debate than are spent on the debate itself.

Both Houses of Parliament can consider other business during the debate on the King's Speech.

In the House of Commons, it would be normal for the King's Speech debate to take priority over other Government business. However, it is possible for the House to take other business in the Chamber as normal while the King's Speech debate is not yet concluded, including on days on which the House also debates the Speech.

The exception is the first day of the King's Speech debate, when there can be no Urgent Questions nor applications for emergency debates under Standing Order No. 24.

There are also no oral questions to Ministers during the first three sitting days of the new Session because Standing Orders specify that there must be a minimum two-day notice period for such questions. This does not apply to Prime Minister’s Questions for which advance notice is not given.

There are no sittings in Westminster Hall until after the debate on the Address in the Commons Chamber is concluded.

In both Houses, the debate starts with the motion to make a humble Address to the King being moved and seconded.

The King's Speech debate is the only occasion in the UK Parliament on which a motion is seconded.

In both Houses, the motion is moved by a Government backbencher, not a Minister. The motion is also seconded by a Government backbencher. (During the coalition government of 2010-15, the motion was moved by a Conservative backbencher and seconded by a Liberal Democrat backbencher.)

In both Houses, the two backbenchers are picked by the Government and usually comprise one long-serving Member and one relative newcomer. By tradition, in both Houses the speeches made by the mover and seconder of the motion are unconventional – they do not make controversial political points, and instead may include personal or (in the Commons) constituency-related comments and reminiscences, and they may be humorous.

In the House of Lords, the first day of the debate consists only of the speeches by the mover and seconder of the motion.

In the House of Commons, the speeches by the mover and seconder of the motion are followed, in order, by those of the Leader of the Opposition, the Prime Minister, the leader of the second-largest opposition party, and then other Members.

In both Houses, the first day of the King’s Speech debate is a general one.

In both Houses, each subsequent day of the debate is normally given a different theme. This is a way of bringing speeches on similar topics together, giving the debate some coherence (and making it easier for Members to decide on which day or days they wish to participate). The themes for debate are not necessarily the same in the two Houses.

The House of Lords normally agrees its motion in response to the King's Speech without amendment or dissent, and so with no need for a formal decision or vote.

In the House of Commons, there is normally a vote on the motion.

The House of Commons may also decide on amendments tabled to the motion.

Under Standing Order No. 33(1), the Speaker may select up to four amendments for debate and decision. Of these, one may be moved on the penultimate day of debate, and up to three on the final day.

Usually, the amendment moved on the penultimate day and one of those moved on the final day are tabled by the Leader of the Opposition. A further amendment in the name of the leader of the third largest party will usually also be moved.

In the normal way, the House first decides whether it agrees with any of the selected amendments. It then decides whether it agrees with the main motion, in its original form (if no amendments have been agreed) or as amended (if amendment[s] have been agreed).

The King’s Speech sets out the Government's policies and programme. The House of Commons' vote(s) on the response to the Speech is (or are), in effect, a vote on whether this programme enjoys the support of the House.

It has therefore long been a constitutional convention that votes on the King's Speech are a matter of confidence, and that if the Government were defeated it would be obliged to resign or seek an early dissolution of Parliament and General Election.

However, there is no legal requirement to this effect, and the Government has not lost a vote on the Gracious Speech since 1924, so there is a degree of uncertainty around the contemporary position. (During the life of the Fixed-term Parliaments Act [FTPA], 2011-2022, further steps would have been needed in any case to trigger an early General Election.) However, a Government that was defeated on the King’s Speech would be in serious political difficulty.

The obligation on the Government to resign after a defeat on the King's Speech would be clearer if the Government stated explicitly before the vote that it was treating it as a matter of confidence; or if the motion on the King’s Speech, rather than simply being defeated, were amended so that it explicitly expressed no-confidence. This is what happened in January 1924.

6:00pm, 6 November 2023

Hansard Society (2023), The debate on the 'Address', (Hansard Society: London)

News / Starmer, Iran, and Parliament’s role in war powers - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 134

What role does Parliament play when the UK is involved in military action? In this week’s episode, we explore the evolving practice of parliamentary war powers, sparked by Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer’s response to recent developments in Iran and the Middle East. We discuss the royal prerogative, the uncertain post-Iraq convention on war powers, and proposals to codify Parliament’s role. Plus, we discuss the return of the Hereditary Peers Bill, proposals to increase MPs’ pay, scrutiny of defence spending, and the Spring Statement and wider economic outlook. Listen and subscribe: Apple Podcasts · Spotify · Acast · YouTube · Other apps · RSS

06 Mar 2026
Read more

Submissions / Written Parliamentary Questions - Our evidence to the House of Commons Procedure Committee

The use of Written Parliamentary Questions (WPQs) is rising sharply. Since July 2024, MPs have tabled questions at unprecedented levels. By late 2025 MPs were tabling over 600 per sitting day, more than double the long-term average. WPQs are a cornerstone of parliamentary scrutiny, helping MPs obtain information, challenge government policy and put issues on the public record. But this surge raises important questions about how Parliament balances transparency and accountability with the practical limits of the system. The House of Commons Procedure Committee is now examining the issue and has just published our submission containing our latest data and analysis.

06 Mar 2026
Read more

News / Parliament Matters Bulletin: What’s coming up in Parliament this week? 2-6 March 2026

The newly elected Green MP, Hannah Spencer, will be introduced to the House of Commons. A Ministerial Statement is expected on the situation in Iran, while the Foreign Secretary faces MPs’ questions. Chancellor Rachel Reeves will deliver her Spring Statement, and MPs will consider billions of pounds in revised departmental spending through the Supplementary Estimates. The Commons will debate the Representation of the People Bill, the contribution of Commonwealth troops in the First World War, and the future of palliative care. In the Lords, Peers will scrutinise the Crime and Policing, Tobacco and Vapes, National Insurance Contributions, and English Devolution bills, as well as debate the India trade deal and International Women’s Day. Select committees will hear from Northern Ireland, Home Office and Cabinet Office ministers, military experts on the Armed Forces Bill, and Bank of England officials.

01 Mar 2026
Read more

News / The forgotten pioneer: Who was Margaret Bondfield, Britain’s first female Cabinet Minister? - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 132

Why is Britain’s first female Cabinet Minister largely forgotten? Historian Nan Sloane discusses her new biography of Margaret Bondfield, the trade unionist who became the first woman in the British Cabinet. Rising from harsh shop-floor conditions to national prominence, Bondfield took office as Minister of Labour in 1929 at the onset of the Great Depression. As economic crisis split the Labour Party, her reputation never recovered. Was she a pioneer, pragmatist, or unfairly judged? Listen and subscribe: Apple Podcasts · Spotify · Acast · YouTube · Other apps · RSS

20 Feb 2026
Read more

News / Mandelson, Andrew and Epstein: Should there be parliamentary committee of inquiry? A conversation with Tom Tugendhat MP - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 133

After the Greens’ Gorton and Denton by-election win, we assess the fallout: pressure on the Prime Minister, possible party-switching, shifting alliances, and whether mainstream parties’ sub-30% vote share could revive electoral reform. Tom Tugendhat MP calls for a parliamentary “super-committee” to probe the Mandelson–Mountbatten-Windsor saga. Plus: Speaker drama over Mandelson’s arrest, and looming battles over the Spring Statement and billions in public spending. Listen and subscribe: Apple Podcasts · Spotify · Acast · YouTube · Other apps · RSS

28 Feb 2026
Read more