CALLS have been stepped up for a referendum post independence on whether the new Scottish state should ditch the monarchy after plans for the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge to become visible symbols of the Union by spending more time in Scotland emerged.
The moves come after it was reported that palace aides want William and Kate to continue a more “muscular approach” in developing the crown’s relationship with Scotland, because Westminster’s politicians are thought to be “losing” the country.
Before the 2014 independence referendum, the then first minister Alex Salmond, set great store by the union of the crowns, believing that the monarchy epitomised “a social union beyond Westminster”.
Last week he warned “desperate Unionists” to keep the royal family out of the debate on independence.
READ MORE: Why the majority of Scots would, despite its flaws, vote to keep the monarchy
Tommy Sheppard, the SNP’s constitutional affairs spokesperson at Westminster, made clear he did not support a referendum on the monarchy before independence but believed it should be a choice Scots have afterwards. Asked if there should be a referendum on the monarchy after independence, he said: “That would be entirely a matter for the people of Scotland and their political representatives. It’s a distraction until we have independence.”
Asked for his views, he said: “My views on this are no secret. I have been a republican all my life. But I am not suggesting that is a precondition for supporting independence. People who are not republicans have also very, very good reasons for supporting independence for Scotland and I don’t want to lose them from the campaign.”
Toni Giugliano (above), a senior SNP activist and the party’s candidate in Dumbarton at last month’s Scottish Parliament election, said an independent Scotland should hold a referendum on whether the country should become a republic.
Giugliano, who stood for the party in Dumbarton in the recent Holyrood election, said: “I’m not advocating a “scrap the monarchy policy” – but rather a policy of neutrality where Scotland will be given a choice on the make up of our head of state upon independence – ideally through a constitutional convention and a referendum.
“As a party in favour of expanding democracy and scrapping the unelected House of Lords this position is not only consistent but entirely reasonable.
“To those who say let’s win independence first I simply say this – to win independence we need to be confident about making the case for change – not be consumed with persuading people that everything will stay the same, as we often did in 2014.
“Right now the SNP is a pro-monarchy party. But public opinion has changed since this policy was last debated at conference. This actually isn’t about the abolition of the monarchy per se – it’s about the vision of a modern, democratic nation with directly elected institutions where sovereignty rests with its people.”
The call comes weeks after former prime minister Gordon Brown was pictured visiting William and Kate at the Palace of Holyroodhouse in Edinburgh – shortly after he unveiled a new campaign to stop independence – and newspapers were briefed that the Queen was to take part in a “charm offensive” to save the Union.
READ MORE: Wee Ginger Dug: No amount of Union flag waving can hide the UK's moral decay
Kensington Palace has also drawn attention to a private meeting Prince William had with First Minister Nicola Sturgeon during his recent visit to Scotland. However, it is understood he did not discuss independence when he met the First Minister during the tour.
The English and Scottish crowns merged after the death of Elizabeth I in 1603, when James VI of Scotland also became James I of England. Political union did not follow until the Acts of Union in 1707. Under the plans promoted by palace aides, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, who are known as the Earl and Countess of Strathearn in Scotland, would spend more time at Balmoral, the Queen’s Scottish estate, treating it as a regular home rather than a place for brief holidays. They would also strengthen their ties with St Andrews, the town where they met as university students.
“They think of it as their Union,” a source close to the royal told the Sunday Times. “It was originally a union of crowns. They think the politicians have been losing Scotland for them. What William is doing is a deliberately more muscular approach to the crown investing in the relationship with Scotland.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel