Constitutional conventions of the United Kingdom

Members should address the House through the chair (typically 'Mr/Madam Speaker/Deputy Speaker').[1]

Members should address each other in the third person and by position ('the Lord Chancellor alleges' or 'the Honourable Member asserted...') or constituency ('last week the Member for Harrow East said in this House...').[1]

Speaking notes are not allowed save for opening speeches, maiden speeches or where particular detail is necessary.[1]

Maiden speeches should occur without interruption. The speaker is congratulated by at least the following two speakers and front bench.[1]

Ministers sit on the front benches to the right of the Speaker, the Chief Whip usually sits immediately next to the gangway. Parliamentary Private Secretaries usually sit immediately behind their minister. Official opposition leadership sit in the front row to the left of the Speaker. Minority party members sit in the back rows below the gangway on the left.[2]

Members are expected to be present from the beginning of a debate and remain for at least two speeches after their own and return for closing speeches.[1]

The chair generally calls members from alternating sides and prioritises those who have been present for a longer period.[1]

Members will formally notify each other when making a formal visit to the other's constituency.[1]

During a general election, the Speaker will stand for election in their constituency unopposed by the major parties. During the election, the Speaker will only campaign as a Speaker seeking re-election and not on any political points.[3]

• This convention was not respected during the 1987 general election, when both the Labour Party and the Social Democratic Party fielded candidates against the Conservative speaker, Bernard Weatherill, who was MP for Croydon North East.
• The Scottish National Party (SNP) does stand against the speaker if they represent a Scottish constituency, as was the case with Michael Martin, speaker from 2000 to 2009.[4]

The Speaker enjoys wide discretion to interpret the Standing Orders and relevance of precedent. They decide the procedure of the House.[1]

Constitutional Bills will be taken in a committee of the whole House.[1]

Forthwith motions are put without debate or amendment.[1]

Same Question Rule - The same or substantially similar motion will not be debated twice in the same parliamentary session.[1]

Money resolutions are provided on a case-by-case assessment.[1]

• This alters the original conventions, that government will provide a money resolution for any private members bill receiving a second reading.[1]

General debates under Standing Order 24[5] (Emergency Debates) will not be amended, and will be neutral in tone.[1]

The submission or rejection of an urgent question by the Speaker is not referred to publicly.[1]

Members of His Majesty's Opposition front bench (the Shadow Cabinet) should be made privy councillors so that information can be shared with them on 'privy council terms.'[6]

Any member that misleads Parliament is expected to resign.

The Prime Minister will attend the House for Prime Minister's Questions. Where the Prime Minister cannot attend, either their deputy or another senior minister must act as a replacement.[7]

• This convention is now firmly established, although the exact structure, length and regularity of questions has been varied by different Prime Ministers.[7]

The Commons has primacy over the Lords.

The Salisbury Convention - The Lords will give a second reading to government Bills on manifesto commitments, a manifesto Bill will not be significantly amended by 'wrecking amendments' which fundamentally alter its substance, a relevant Bill will be sent to the Commons in sufficient time to deal with any amendments.

Commons Financial Privilege - The Lords will not oppose or make wrecking amendments to Bills dealing with taxation or expenditure. Where such an amendment is made, the Bill will be returned to the Lords with a note indicating a breach of the convention.

Delegated legislation (statutory instruments) should only rarely be objected to by the Lords.

The House of Lords debates the conflict in Ukraine. The Lord Speaker can be seen to the rear, seated on the woolsack.

Members should refer to each other by title or position.

Speeches may not be read, though there may be extensive use of notes.

Members should attend the greater part of debates and at least the opening, winding-up speeches and the two proceeding their own speech.

Maiden and valedictory speeches should be short and uncontroversial; they should be heard without interruption (members should remain seated throughout). Maiden speakers should be congratulated by the next speaker and the front bench if they choose.

Commonly, the House rises by 10pm on Mondays-Wednesdays, 7pm on Thursdays and 3pm on Fridays though this is often varied.

The Legislative Office advice on the orderliness of amendments to Bills will be followed.

The Sewel Convention applies to the Scottish Parliament.

Statutory instruments (SI) should be laid before the Senedd at least 21 days before coming into force. This is colloquially known as the 21-day rule. If breached, the Welsh Ministers must notify the Presiding Officer of this fact when the SI is laid and explain the reasons why it was late.[18]

The Sewel Convention applies to the Senedd.

The Sewel Convention applies to the Northern Irish Assembly.

The Law Officers are the primary legal advisers to the Crown.

The Law Officers' Convention - The advice of Law Officers is not usually disclosed.[1]

• The Cabinet Manual states the convention operates as follows: the fact that the Law Officers have advised, or have not advised, and the content of their advice may not be disclosed outside government without their authority. The Law Officers’ advice to government is subject to legal professional privilege (LPP) and is confidential.[19]

The Shawcross Convention - The Law Officers may consult with other ministers as to the 'public interest' when making prosecution decisions, but must make the decision entirely on their own judgement and without party political pressure, interest or favour.[20]

A further convention in relation to Law Officer advice, operating on other Ministers, is that the Law Officers must be consulted by ministers or their officials in good time before the Government is committed to critical decisions involving legal considerations.[19]

The Government must uphold the independence of the judiciary.

• Since 2005 this convention has been overtaken by the statutory obligations placed on the Lord Chancellor under the 'guarantee of continued judicial independence' at section 3 Constitutional Reform Act 2005.[21]

Ministers will not criticise judicial decisions; judges will not criticise Government policy.[21]

Members of the judiciary will not comment on political issues while serving.

The Supreme Court have continued to affirm the view that conventions remain unenforceable in law despite being included in statute, so long as the legislation still expresses these conventions as merely conventions. Section 2 of the Scotland Act 2016 and Wales Act 2017 placed the Sewel convention within legislation. However, recognising the existence of the convention within legislation did not alter the status of the convention. The Supreme Court in Miller No 1 confirmed the status of the Sewel Convention as only a convention and not legally enforceable.

[B]y such provisions, the UK Parliament is not seeking to convert the Sewel Convention into a rule which can be interpreted, let alone enforced, by the courts; rather, it is recognising the convention for what it is, namely a political convention, and is effectively declaring that it is a permanent feature of the relevant devolution settlement. That follows from the nature of the content, and is acknowledged by the words (“it is recognised” and “will not normally”), of the relevant subsection. We would have expected UK Parliament to have used other words if it were seeking to convert a convention into a legal rule justiciable by the courts.

— R (on the application of Miller and another) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union [2017] UKSC 5, "Miller No 1"

In taking this view, the Court noted 'the practical benefits of achieving harmony between legislatures in areas of competing competence' which would require the retained capacity of the Westminster Parliament to avoiding duplication of effort, enable the UK Parliament to make UK-wide legislation where appropriate and avoid any risk of legal challenge to the authority of the devolved legislatures.