GRAHAM Smith’s article in the Sunday National on “Why the royals have to go” was cogent, eloquent and absorbing. The continuation of this exorbitant charade makes no ethical or economic sense in any era but the existence of a royal family at a time of severe budgetary cutbacks and genuine poverty is, as Mr Smith acknowledges, morally bankrupt and manifestly absurd.
Like him, I would argue that the monarchy is wholly incompatible with equality in any modern state. The existence of a royal family, with countless hangers-on, perpetuates class divisions in 21st-century society to the extent that these anachronistic divisions become socially accepted and even celebrated by some.
READ MORE: King Charles and Camilla Scotland service set to see protests
With the economic uncertainties and constitutional disorientation fuelled by Brexit, together with the re-emergence of a pugnacious and reckless form of English nationalism, it is clear that an unthinking acceptance of, or deference to, the institution of the monarchy should not be tolerated in a future independent Scotland. There is no logical argument in favour of retaining the monarchy and I believe that the royal family would be an embarrassing and expensive burden to Scottish taxpayers.
Our present-day monarchy masquerades as historical tradition but in truth it is a questionable business enterprise. Mr Smith states that the King and his son rake in £22 million annually from the Duchies of Cornwall and Lancaster but this is only part of the royal gravy train they enjoy whilst others struggle to pay fuel and food bills as well as rents and mortgages in the real world.
Figures released by Buckingham Palace in 2019 informed us that the price of having a monarchy rose by around 40% on the previous year, meaning that £67m was lavished on private jets, trains, trips abroad, refurbishment of ostentatious homes and palaces and on literally thousands of camp followers.
READ MORE: King Charles hands Scotland's highest royal honour to Camilla
As the chief executive of Republic also notes, the antiquated and iniquitous practice of “King’s consent” still allows the royal family to remain above the law of the land and influence any legislation that may affect their own economic interests or financial wellbeing. His proposal that we should judge the performance of the royal family by the Nolan Principles is very apposite and revealing. Leading members of the royal family are undoubtedly above the law, whether it is in avoiding paying taxes, shady deals with Saudi businessmen or taxpayer funding to finance paying off troublesome and embarrassing lawsuits.
The royal family is unequivocally a waste of public money and their Ruritanian foray north of the Border following the bestowing of another ridiculous title on the King’s wife is insulting and morally repugnant in equal measure.
Our First Minister recently discussed the idea of a referendum on the monarchy in an independent Scotland and this is surely a sensible and democratic way to proceed with the question of whether or not we should, like Ireland, have a republic with an elected president in place of an outdated, morally questionable and exorbitant royal family.
The traditional empirical baggage they represent and the archaic, class-conscious, obsequious fawning that the royals are greeted with by some will have no place in a new, modern and egalitarian state. An independent Scotland must shake the dust from its feet and remember that monarchy murders meritocracy. It is an injudicious and scandalous waste of time and money and in an independent Scotland they should be rejected and consigned to the dustbin of history, where they undeniably belong.
Owen Kelly
Stirling
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