Removal of Titles Bill

Why the Removal of Titles Bill Really Failed (And It’s Not About Harry and Meghan)

Introduction & Historical Context

Definition and Purpose
Introduced in June 2022 by Labour MP Rachael Maskell, the Removal of Titles Bill was a private member’s Presentation Bill aimed at legally empowering the monarch to revoke hereditary titles—such as dukedoms and baronetcies—from individuals found to have brought them into disrepute.

This Bill emerged in response to a glaring void in British law: while the monarch could strip individuals of honours like knighthoods, there existed no mechanism to rescind hereditary peerages.

The most prominent example of this gap was Prince Andrew, who—despite the Queen removing many of his titles due to scandal—remained Duke of York. Maskell observed:

“Not even the Queen … was able to remove his Dukedom. This legislation will therefore enable … to sever all ties”.

A parallel was drawn with the 1917 Titles Deprivation Act, which allowed the removal of titles from those who sided with Britain’s wartime enemies—although its scope was narrow and wartime-specific.

Sponsorship & Aims

Sponsor & Backing

  • MP: Rachael Maskell (York Central, Labour).

  • Type: Private Members’ Presentation Bill, her individual initiative—not government-led.

Objectives

  1. Allow the monarch—on their own initiative or via joint parliamentary committee recommendation—to strip hereditary titles.

  2. Close the legal loophole exploited by controversial title-holders like Prince Andrew.

  3. Enable Parliament to act where public sentiment demanded accountability, yet no route for redress existed.

Text Overview

The Bill proposed:

  • A statutory power, enabling the monarch to remove any hereditary title.

  • Removal also withdraws peerage rights (e.g., Lords membership) and annulment of privileges from patent.

  • Activation could occur via two routes:

    • The monarch’s own initiative.

    • Following a recommendation by a joint committee of Parliament.

  • Defined titles included all hereditary peerages and baronetcies across the UK and Ireland.

  • Would extend to England, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. Effective day-of-passage.

Legislative Journey & Parliamentary Procedure

Presentation & First Reading

  • Bill presented on 20 June 2022; formally read for the first time and printed as Bill 111 in the 2022–23 session.

Second Reading

  • Initially scheduled for 9 December 2022; Second Reading would debate the general ethos.

Committee Stages & Carry‑Over

  • As a Presentation Bill it limited parliamentary time.

  • It did not complete all stages before the session’s end.

  • Though Public Bills may be carried over if a government motion is passed, private member’s Presentation Bills rarely secure such time, and this Bill lacked government sponsorship.

  • The Bill ultimately lapsed at the Session’s end, with no carry-over motion arranged.

Mischaracterisations: Was the Bill About the Sussexes?

In public discourse — particularly across tabloid media and social platforms — the Removal of Titles Bill was frequently misrepresented as legislation aimed at stripping the Duke and Duchess of Sussex of their titles following their withdrawal from senior royal duties in 2020 and subsequent criticisms of the monarchy.

However, such interpretations are inaccurate for several reasons.

Scope of the Bill

First, the Bill explicitly dealt with hereditary titles — such as dukedoms, marquessates, earldoms, viscountcies, baronies, and baronetcies. The Dukedom of Sussex, granted to Prince Harry upon his marriage in 2018, is indeed a hereditary peerage. However, Meghan Markle’s title of Duchess of Sussex is a courtesy title derived solely from her husband’s rank; she holds no peerage in her own right.

More importantly, the Bill was designed to apply only when a title-holder had brought the title into serious disrepute, and its introduction came primarily in response to public concerns over Prince Andrew, Duke of York, following the settlement of a civil sexual assault lawsuit and his removal from military patronages and royal duties. As Labour MP Rachael Maskell, the Bill’s sponsor, clarified:

“The focus has been on the Duke of York, and it was that which brought this to my attention”
(rachaelmaskell.com).

No Government or Royal Push to Remove Sussex Titles

Crucially, neither the Government nor Buckingham Palace signalled any intention to remove Prince Harry and Meghan’s Sussex titles. While some commentators, especially in tabloid media and certain political quarters, called for such action following the Sussexes’ public criticisms of the royal family, there was no formal process or political appetite within Parliament to target them through law.

Moreover, the Bill proposed that the monarch or a joint parliamentary committee would assess cases on specific grounds of reputational harm, not on political or personal disagreements. Public expressions of dissent or stepping back from official duties — as in the Sussexes’ case — did not meet that threshold.

The Role of Misleading Media Narratives

The association of the Bill with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex can largely be traced to media simplification and sensationalism. Headlines suggested it was “the law to strip Harry and Meghan’s titles,” ignoring the Bill’s limited scope, its procedural hurdles, and its lack of cross-party or government support.

This misrepresentation also reflects a broader trend in modern royal reporting, where complex constitutional or legal issues are frequently framed through the lens of personal drama, overshadowing substantive governance debates.

Why It Failed

Procedural Constraints

  • Presentation Bills are low-priority and often run out of parliamentary time without government backing.

  • The Removal of Titles Bill did not benefit from scheduling or promotion to secure Committee stage or beyond.

Political & Constitutional Sensitivities

  • Stripping hereditary titles—long seen as symbols of stature and lineage—might be viewed as constitutional overreach or punitive.

  • The Bill risked triggering wider debates about peerage reform, historic privilege, and sovereignty of monarchy.

  • Without robust cross-party support or urgent government endorsement, it lacked the political momentum needed.

Overlap with Parallel Reform Efforts

  • Other bills—like those addressing hereditary peer reform in the House of Lords—held precedence.

  • Parliament’s agenda prioritised broad structural changes (e.g., removing hereditary peers entirely) over targeted title-removal legislation.

Aftermath and Outlook

  • As of summer 2025, the Bill has not been reintroduced, though Maskell might bring a renewed version in a future session.

  • The matter remains relevant in high-profile ongoing omissions—such as unresolved questions around Prince Andrew’s Duke of York title.

  • Broader constitutional reform continues, notably via the House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill (2024–25), but these do not empower the monarch nor parliamentary committees to strip titles individually .

  • Hence, unless a new Bill is brought forward and contextually reframed, the legal lacuna endures.

Conclusion

The Removal of Titles Bill (Bill 111, 2022–23) was a principled attempt to repair a glaring gap in constitutional law: the absence of legal means to remove hereditary titles from those who abuse their prestige. Though grounded in notable precedent and widely supported in principle, the Bill failed due to procedural marginalisation typical of Presentation Bills, combined with a politically sensitive subject that required broader cooperation.

Without strong government sponsorship, public drive, or cross-party unity, even well-meaning reforms—especially those directed at historical institutions—can falter. That this Bill couldn’t complete its journey through Parliament underscores both the inertia of the legislative system and the enduring complexity of reforming ancient rights entwined with monarchy.

Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh

The Funeral of the Duke of Edinburgh

The funeral of the Duke of Edinburgh takes place in London tomorrow. Because of the COVID-19 restrictions, there will only be thirty guests at the event, and (by my calculations) twenty of them are on the line of succession. Let’s have a look at the list.

  1. HM The Queen. She’s obviously not on the line of succession – having popped off the top of it in 1952.
  2. Prince Charles, The Prince of Wales. Charles is number 1 on the list and is the Duke’s eldest son and, therefore, the person who inherits the title Duke of Edinburgh.
  3. Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall. The wife of the Prince of Wales. She’s not on the line of succession.
  4. Princess Anne, The Princess Royal. The Duke’s second child and only daughter. She’s surprisingly far down the line of succession, at number 15.
  5. Timothy Laurence. The husband of the Princess Royal. Not on the line of succession.
  6. Prince Andrew, Duke of York. The Duke’s third child and second son. He’s currently number 8 on the line of succession.
  7. Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex. The Duke’s youngest child and third son. He’s currently number 12 on the line of succession. Edward is expected to be granted a new Dukedom of Edinburgh once the title merges with the Crown (i.e. when Prince Charles becomes king).
  8. Sophie, Countess of Wessex. The wife of the Earl of Wessex. She’s not on the line of succession.
  9. Prince William, Duke of Cambridge. The eldest son of the Prince of Wales. He’s number 2 on the line of succession.
  10. Kate, Duchess of Cambridge. The wife of the Duke of Cambridge. She’s not on the line of succession.
  11. Prince Henry (Harry), Duke of Sussex. The second (and youngest) son of the Prince of Wales. He’s number 6 on the line of succession.
  12. Peter Phillips. Eldest child of the Princess Royal and the Duke’s eldest grandchild. He’s number 16 on the line of succession.
  13. Zara Tindall. Second and youngest child of the Princess Royal. She’s number 19 on the line of succession.
  14. Mike Tindall. Husband of Zara Tindall. He’s not on the line of succession.
  15. Princess Beatrice of York. Eldest daughter of the Duke of York. She’s number 9 on the line of succession.
  16. Edoardo Mapelli Mozzi. Husband of Princess Beatrice. He’s not on the line of succession.
  17. Princess Eugenie of York. Second daughter of the Duke of York. She’s number 10 on the line of succession.
  18. Jack Brooksbank. Husband of Princess Eugenie. He’s not on the line of succession.
  19. Lady Louise Windsor. Eldest child of the Earl of Wessex. She’s number 14 on the line of succession.
  20. James, Viscount Severn. Second child of the Earl of Wessex. He’s number 13 on the line of succession. He’s higher than his older sister because they were born before the abolition of male-preference primogeniture.
  21. Prince Edward, Duke of Kent. The Queen’s first cousin. He’s number 39 on the line of succession.
  22. Prince Richard, Duke of Gloucester. The Queen’s first cousin. He’s number 29 on the line of succession.
  23. Princess Alexandra, Lady Ogilvy. The Queen’s first cousin. She’s between 52 and 55 on the line of succession (it’s unclear because we’re not sure about the status of some of her nephews and nieces who may have converted to Catholicism – I should write a blog post about that).
  24. Bernhard, Hereditary Prince of Baden. The Duke’s great nephew. He’ll be on the line of succession, but somewhere down in the 600s.
  25. Prince Donatus, Landgreve of Hesse. A distant cousin of the Duke. As a descendant of Queen Victoria, he’ll be on the line of succession, but who knows where!
  26. Philipp, Prince of Hohenlohe-Langenburg. The Duke’s great nephew. He’ll be on the line of succession but somewhere down in the 600s.
  27. The Earl of Snowdon. The Queen’s nephew. He’s number 24 on the line of succession.
  28. Penelope Knatchbull, Countess Mountbatten of Burma. First cousin by marriage of the Duke. She’s not on the list.
  29. Lady Sarah Chatto. Niece of the Queen. She’s number 26 on the line of succession.
  30. Daniel Chatto. Husband of Lady Sarah Chatto. He’s not on the line of succession.

Some interesting compromises have been made. None of the Duke’s great-grandchildren is in attendance. At 13, Viscount Severn will be the youngest mourner and the Queen will be the eldest (followed, I think, by the Duke of Kent). There’s no room for divorced or separated spouses. And the absence of the Duchess of Sussex (who couldn’t fly due to her pregnancy) freed up a space for someone else.

What interesting things have you noticed in the list?

[Update: I’ve fixed a typo and a factual error in the text – as pointed out in the comments below.]

Prince Philip and Prince Edward

The Next Duke of Edinburgh

At some point in the next ten years, we will have a new Duke of Edinburgh. But who will it be? People seem to be confused on the matter. Let’s try to clear it up.

The confusion seems to stem from an announcement made by Buckingham Palace on the morning of Prince Edward’s wedding to Sophie Rhys-Jones on 19 June 1999. Unlike his brothers, Edward was not given a royal Dukedom on his wedding day, but it was announced that the Queen intended for him to be made the Duke of Edinburgh “in due course”. It’s that “in due course” that confuses people. What does it mean?

Some people think that Edward will be made Duke of Edinburgh immediately after his father dies. But that’s very unlikely to happen as it goes against everything we know about how titles are inherited. The Duke of Edinburgh is a perfectly normal peerage. It will follow the normal rules of inheritance. That is to say, when the current Duke dies, his title will be inherited by his eldest son – who is, of course, Prince Charles.

Of course, Charles already has plenty of titles. He’s the Prince of Wales, the Duke of Cornwall, the Duke of Rothesay and a few more besides. If he inherits his father’s dukedom, that title will just be added to the pile and you’ll never hear it spoken of as many of his other titles are more important.

Sometime later, the Queen will die and Charles will become King. At that point, all of his titles merge with the crown and, effectively, cease to exist (the Dukedoms of Cornwall and Rothesay are special – they are automatically held by the eldest son of the monarch, so they will immediately be passed to Prince William). When that happens, the Dukedom of Edinburgh will be available to be created again (for the fourth time) and bestowed on Prince Edward. This is presumably what the Queen was hinting at in her announcement on Edward’s wedding day.

So if Prince Philip dies before the Queen, the next Duke of Edinburgh will be Prince Charles and only after the Queen has also died can he bestow it on his youngest brother. Of course, it might not happen like that. It’s possible that the Queen could die before Prince Philip. In that case, Prince Charles becomes King and Philip retains his dukedom. Then when Philip eventually dies, Charles inherits the title, but as he’s King the title merges with the crown and is available to be created again. It doesn’t matter in what order it happens, but both the Queen and Prince Philip need to die before Prince Edward can become the Duke of Edinburgh.

It might be instructive to quickly run through all the Royal Dukedoms to see what might happen to them over the next few years.

Duke of Cornwall / Duke of Rothsay

As stated above, these are dukedoms with special rules. They are both automatically held by the eldest son of the monarch. When Prince Charles becomes King, they will be passed on to Prince William.

Duke of Edinburgh

As explained above, this will be inherited by Prince Charles and will merge with the crown when he becomes King. At the point, the current Queen has indicated that she would like a new creation of this dukedom to be bestowed on Prince Edward.

Duke of Cambridge

The future of this dukedom depends on the order in which people die. When Prince Charles is King, Prince William will hold on to his dukedom as well as becoming Duke of Cornwall, Duke of Rothesay and, presumably, Prince of Wales. As the Cambridge title is less important than any of those, you won’t see it being used. If, as you’d expect in the normal course, Prince Charles dies before Prince William, William will become King and the dukedom will merge with the crown and cease to exist. If, however, Prince William dies without becoming King, the dukedom will be inherited by Prince George.

Duke of York

As dukedoms are only ever inherited by sons, and Prince Andrew only has daughters, it looks like this dukedom will cease to exist on Prince Andrew’s death.

Duke of Gloucester

This far down the line of succession, we are unlikely to be troubled by complication caused by titleholders becoming monarchs. Therefore, we can be certain that Prince Richard will be followed as Duke of Gloucester by his eldest son, Alexander Windsor, Earl of Ulster.

Duke of Kent

Prince Edward (a different one) will be succeeded as Duke of Kent by his son, George Windsor, Earl of St Andrews.

It’s worth noting that, as the great-grandsons of King George V, neither Alexander Windsor nor his second cousin George Windsor is a prince. That is a honour that stops at the grandsons of a monarch.