Possible Scottish Independence and the Monarchy

[cepe]

The debate on Scottish Independence is hotting up and the papers are looking at all sorts of angles.

The Scottish Nationalist Party (name defines position) has always said that they wanted to have the Queen as Monarch - in effect to be another realm.

The Daily Express has said that this would not be Scotland's decision but of the UK Government. Here is (not very good) article which puts forward the proposal that if the Queen is not available, then they could follow the Stuart line.

House of Stuart's Duchess of Alba could become next Queen of Scotland if independence vote | UK | News | Daily Express

This is just trying to stir things up but it left me with the question - Who's decision is it? Is it UK Government who decides? Interested in opinions




If there is a thread about Scottish Independence and Royal outcomes, apologies and could Mods move this

 

[Al_bina]

I am just curious ...


How plausible is a possibility of Scottish independence? It is great that Duchess of Alba has got the perfect pedigree and possibly the strongest claim. But ... Will Duchess of Alba lay any claims to the Scottish throne? If not, will she be invited to rule?
Does the Scottish Nationalist Party speak for all other Scottish parties and Scotsmen/women? Does Scotland have a council of clans or something similar? Why is it assumed that a newly independent Scotland will opt for monarchy?

 

[Ish]

I find it interesting that the British government may have a say in whether or not HM continues to have a relationship with a newly independent realm. I can't see how it would be the right of the British government to decide whether or not another state would be able to maintain it's relationship with the monarch - and in as much as HM is the Queen of the UK she is also independently the Queen of Canada, Australia, etc, which begs the question of just how much does the British government dictate her relationship with her other realms?

As to the idea that the Duchess of Alba being a Jacobite claimaint.... While she does descend from James II, it's in an illegitimate line. There are many people who can trace their descent from the Stuarts through legitimate lines that would come before the Duchess but after Franz of Bavaria - one could even argue that if illegitimate lines are considered, then descendants of the illegitimate children of Charles II have just as much of a claim, if not more of one, than those of James II.

With regards to the Jacobite succession through legitimate lines, as it stands there are two popular claimaints - Franz of Bavaria being the most commonly accepted one, but Infanta Alicia, Duchess of Calabria also has a claim owing to a marriage in Franz's line having occurred contrary to British law (the claimant, Maria Beatrice, married her uncle, which was legal where it happened, but illegal in Britain).

Further, while Franz doesn't generally comment in his claim now, he may feel differently were the throne actually offered to him.

 

[Lenora]

That matter is very interesting, but I doubt Scotland will turn into monarchy, if it becomes independent.

And the main religious confession in Scotland is the Church of Scotland, while Dukes of Alba are Catholics (like Stuarts of course).

It will be interesting to read the opinions of Scots before upcoming referendum.

 

[cepe]

I found it interesting as well. This journalist may not know one end of the constitution from another - this reads like a mischief piece to me.

But I don't know how the decision is made. I feel v ignorant of not understanding the process. How did Australia, NZ and the other realms decide on the Queen as Head of State? Did they decide or was the decision placed upon them and who by (ie British Government or the newly established realm government)?

As for plausibility - too soon to say. Personally I started out thinking it would happen; then the detail began to emerge and I don't think the fiscal and EU plans have been thought out enough. Too many assumptions and no Plan B is how it looks. But there is still time for that to be sorted out. Some Pundits are saying that it could happen because of the Scots not liking the English rather than a desire of independence. Others that this is an enormous blag to get more power for the Scottish partliament and it isn't really serious.

I think it is serious, and that emotion will play a big part in the decision.

Re Religion - Queen is not Head of the Church of Scotland. There is also serious Cathlic/Protestant divide in some cities. The Express Journalist has totally ignored this - another reason for thinking its a mischief piece.

 

[Marengo]

If it does become independent it is very unlikely that it will start with an anachronism, which the monarchy is these days.

Isn't the duke of Bavaria the Jacobite claimant btw?

 

[Iluvbertie]

In the case of Australia the position of The Queen was never seriously debated when we became a Federation - particularly as the law establishing that fact was debated in the UK Parliament and our Constitution was in fact an Act of the UK Parliament signed into law by Queen Victoria.

I suspect much the same for the other realms - their constitutions etc were passed as Acts of British Parliament and hence it was a no brainer that the British monarch was also their monarch - unless they expressly requested to be a republic as did India.

To my understanding there would need to be a second referendum on the issue of keeping the monarch as monarch of Scotland - don't remember where I read that but that is what I understand.

 

[cepe]

Thanks Iluvbertie - that helps my understanding. So it is possible that in the process of Parliament agreeing formally the separation (which I think will be needed for legal reasons) it could be dealt with at this time.

This whole process is v frustrating. Only the Scots are voting on this but it is only in the past 2-3 weeks that debate has been introduced on a wider basis. And it appears that assumptions made (and for all I know debated) in Scotland are being wiped away as the debate opens up.

Assumption that independent Scotland can keep the £pound - answer is no.
Assumption that could join EU - answer is not on the current standing of Scotlands finances
Assumption they will have the Queen as Head of State - ONE journalist has said it cant be assumed

There are many other issues that have come up and I'm not going to get into politics. This isn't the place and anyway I'm still learning.

I just hope the UK stays together - if Scotland goes, there is no coming back and we are stronger together (I think that might be a political slogan so apologies for that).

 

[tommy100]

If it does become independent it is very unlikely that it will start with an anachronism, which the monarchy is these days.

Isn't the duke of Bavaria the Jacobite claimant btw?

My understanding (and I may be wrong) is that eventually the Jacobite claimant will be Prince Josef Wenzel, the heir to the heir of the Principality of Liechtenstein.

Ling of Scotland, Sovereign Prince of Liechtenstein has a ring to it don't you think

 

[cepe]

My understanding (and I may be wrong) is that eventually the Jacobite claimant will be Prince Josef Wenzel, the heir to the heir of the Principality of Liechtenstein.

Ling of Scotland, Sovereign Prince of Liechtenstein has a ring to it don't you think

My opinion is that Independent Scotland could end up with President Salmond

 

[julliette]

It's a very interesting topic and you all raised many important and interesting questions. I suspect no one (not even the politicians) know how to answer many of those questions. An indepence is always a very complex issue and most of what shapes the new/independent country is the result of negotiations, so a bit impossible to know before it happens. But we can always guess.

The idea that the british government will have a say in the possibility of the Queen being also Queen of Scotland is a bit weird. Why is it that way? Does the government, the parliament or even the country "own" the Queen and she, thus, has no independence to decide those things? Even if the Queen has to ask permission of the Government, what would David Cameron's answer be? Would he risk to say "No, Ma'am, I don't allow you to be their Queen" to HM? It would making very unpopular with her, no? (I'm here assuming she wants to be their Queen) How would the UK (minus scotish) people (whose vote matters for Cameron) react?

Has the question that will be asked in the referendum been decided? If not, futher questions such as monarchy vs republic could be asked at the same time, no?

 

[cepe]

The referendum takes place on Thursday 18th September and the referendum question is " “Should Scotland be an independent country ?”

That's it.

As I said in post #8 it all seems to be based on a lot of assumptions. At the moment the focus is on fiscal issues. The SNP assumed they could keep the £pound but the £pound sterling belongs to the UK and the SNP wish to leave the UK (that is very simply put). They have been told they cannot have financial union with the remainder of the UK if they split. They will not immediately meet the EU criteria for taking on the Euro. So there is a lot of debate to be had.

I dont know whether the comments from the journalist in the Express are accurate regarding whether it is up to the UK government whether the Queen could be Queen of an independent Scotland. I'm going to investigate further but thought that other people on here might know.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Looking back through the last 60 plus years when most of the other realms went that way what happened was that they gained independence through legislation in Britain with The Queen as Head of State. At some point after that most of them have held referenda or had some other means to become a republic so if legislation is needed for Scotland to become independent from the UK then that will also address the question of the Queen remaining as Head of State.

It must be remembered that when she became Queen she was the Head of an Empire and Commonwealth of over 50 nations but is now only Queen of 16 with most of them having moved on from a shared Head of State with the UK and others considering that possibility.

However, as there is a straight referendum on the question of independence there might be no need for legislation from the UK Parliament and only from the Scottish Assembly and thus they may not have the power to legislation one way or the other on the issue of The Queen.

Another thing that Scotland hasn't considered, it seems, is that if they don't have The Queen as Head of State membership of the Commonwealth isn't automatic either.

 

[cepe]

Looking back through the last 60 plus years when most of the other realms went that way what happened was that they gained independence through legislation in Britain with The Queen as Head of State. At some point after that most of them have held referenda or had some other means to become a republic so if legislation is needed for Scotland to become independent from the UK then that will also address the question of the Queen remaining as Head of State.

It must be remembered that when she became Queen she was the Head of an Empire and Commonwealth of over 50 nations but is now only Queen of 16 with most of them having moved on from a shared Head of State with the UK and others considering that possibility.

However, as there is a straight referendum on the question of independence there might be no need for legislation from the UK Parliament and only from the Scottish Assembly and thus they may not have the power to legislation one way or the other on the issue of The Queen.

Another thing that Scotland hasn't considered, it seems, is that if they don't have The Queen as Head of State membership of the Commonwealth isn't automatic either.

TBH I hadn't either because there are countries in the Commonwealth which do not have the Queen as HoS. What is the process if they don't have the Queen as HoS and they want to stay in the Commonwealth?

 

[Iluvbertie]

TBH I hadn't either because there are countries in the Commonwealth which do not have the Queen as HoS. What is the process if they don't have the Queen as HoS and they want to stay in the Commonwealth?

The new republic needs to apply for membership and then, after meeting all the necessary criteria (which Scotland probably would meet) they have to be elected to membership. I remember the discussion about this issue in Australia when we were voting on becoming a republic in 1999 with the suggestion that maybe the other countries wouldn't want us to remain in the Commonwealth.

 

[Al_bina]

One more point

cepe,
Thanks for informative posts!
If Scotland is independent, what will happen to estates/lands (if such exist) owned by the British royal family?

 

[cepe]

If Scotland is independent, what will happen to estates/lands (if such exist) owned by the British royal family?

Balmoral is privately owned and unless a new Scottish Government intends to do a land-grab, it will remain in private ownership as will other estates. Holyrood will belong to the new state of Scotland.

 

[Al_bina]

Thanks for the information!
Hopefully the situation will be resolved to the satisfaction of all concerned.

 

[TLLK]

I have very little knowledge of this Scottish Independence movement so please bear with me.

How dependent is Scotland upon the other countries that make up the UK?
Would it be able to function independently if it chooses to separate?

 

[AristoCat]

This is going to be a hugely interesting year, isn't it? The Scots deciding the fate of their country (and to a second extent the future of the Windsors in Scotland) and it's not like this would be a simple thing. I heard that Cameron won't let the Scots use the Pound Sterling and that HM might actually lost her title "Queen of Scotland," thus making her only Queen of England and Northern Ireland. Right now she's Queen of Britain and the Commonwealth, but without Scotland, there is no "Britain" and she would no longer be a Queen in Scotland. That would be a pretty big blow to her.

Realistically the Scots could bring back the Stuarts.

I've read a biography about Mary Queen of Scots by Stefan Zweig and it describes the fractious Scots nobility and described the Scots crown as a crown of thorns. Yet, times have changed and Scotland would likely enjoy a huge resurgence of nationalism and would likely bring an independent Sovereign back, one not connected to the House of Windsor.

The Windsors have very little Scottish lineage, it's been diluted considerably, via Danish and German wives and the RF really doesn't do much in Scotland (outside of Balmoral).

HM must be horrendously upset about all this. First Scotland will break away, then likely set up a monarch of their own and end up with a new RF. It would make HM puke, unless the RF managed to set up some kind of marriage match. Yet, if nothing happens, like the Duchess of Alba taking over, HM would puke out of sheer humiliation.

I wonder how this would affect the Spencer Family; they are hugely British with dallops of Stuart lineage and I wonder how they must feel about the Monarchy being drastically reduced like this, with the possibility of a Stuart relation taking on the throne.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Can I remind people that The Queen herself is descended from the Stuarts - Mary, Queen of Scots - James - Elizabeth - Sophia - George I etc through the Hanoverians.

The fact that William is a descendant of Charles II through his mother doesn't mean that he isn't also a Stuart through his father's lineage as well.

As far as the Commonwealth is concerned - there is no position such as Queen of the Commonwealth. There is a Head of the Commonwealth and that position isn't hereditary. Over the last couple of years The Queen has started pushing for Charles to follow her in that position but that is a recent thing because she knows it isn't automatic.

The Queen is used to countries breaking away from her as she is averaging close to one a year since she became Queen. I imagine she will treat it as all the others - privately may be upset but publicly she will put a good face on things and say things like - 'it is for the Scottish people to decide' as she did when Australia voted in 1999.

 

[wbenson]

The idea that the british government will have a say in the possibility of the Queen being also Queen of Scotland is a bit weird. Why is it that way?

If it comes down to it, Scotland will be receiving independence through passage of an act of the British parliament. The British government will have a direct say over every part of that legislation, and could simply choose not to bring the legislation before Parliament if it disagrees with the way the new country will be set up. That's not necessarily a politically wise thing to do, but it would be within the government's powers.

How did Australia, NZ and the other realms decide on the Queen as Head of State? Did they decide or was the decision placed upon them and who by (ie British Government or the newly established realm government)?

The oldest realms have, as I understand it, never explicitly established a separate monarchy. They gained independence incrementally and the separateness of the crown went along with that. It's one of the reasons why Canada is having the most difficult time changing the line of succession. There's no actual Canadian law saying who the monarch should be, so amending it is difficult given that it doesn't strictly exist. (The position of the current government is that the line of succession currently lies only in British law, and that the easiest thing to do is to "consent" to the British changes. This is a little bizarre because Britain foreswore its ability to legislate for Canada in 1982.)

 

[Jacknch]

Thank you Cepe for opening this thread and to everyone who has commented so far! It is an interesting subject to talk about and here in the UK we really do need to talk about all the various and intricate issues surrounding the prospect of Scottish independence.

At the moment much has been discussed in the media based upon what the politicians on both sides of the border are saying and indeed the focus is concentrating on issues such as finance and currency. The battle of words between Westminster and Holyrood will continue all year, with Westminster maintaining their stance against independence - that will be it, no going back, no currency, no Queen, no financial help etc etc! But the reality would be different, because I cannot imagine the remaining UK countries abandoning Scotland to a lonely fate. It will only be after a "yes" vote that all the negotiations will start. The Queen would certainly want the remaining UK countries to support and assist Scotland in the transition.

I know very little about how the Scottish people themselves feel and have not come across any opinion polls or surveys showing "how would you vote". I suspect the result will most likely be a very close run thing, although I do not know what percentages are need to pass the vote yes or no.

I understand that the Scottish parliament are keen to retain the Queen as Head of State, but I would bet my last English pound that if they couldn't keep the Queen, a certain first minister would be more than happy to take on the role!!

 

[wyevale]

Elizabeth 11 is also Queen of Scots.

I can see no reason why IF {God Forbid} the Scots vote for independence she should not remain so.. Scotland will become another 'realm and territory' of which she is Queen.

I cannot see why the Scots [who seem increasingly xenophobic] would plump for a Spanish or Bavarian Monarch. when they have one [who is half-Scot] already.

 

[Victorian-Dandy]

As someone who is part Scot (amongst a few other nationalities) I can honestly say that the thought of independence horrifies me simply because nothing has been thought through by Salmond and the SNP, to be honest this whole thing reeks of a schoolyard spat that's gotten out of control.

Being blunt I trust Salmond about as much as I trust Cameron and Co....ie not very.

Family and friends North of the border are for the most part disinterested in an independent Scotland, all they want is for those in power in London to realise is that the world doesn't centre on them and the home counties. Unfortunately the more Osborne speaks, the more likely Scots are going to vote yes even if they want to say no simply because he is really doing a good job of getting the Scots back up.

Even if there is a definite YES vote these sort of things don't happen overnight, it could take years for everything to be finalised.

I just hope that those that can vote when the time comes do so with a level head and do not allow their distrust of Westminster to sway their vote.

We are united for a reason and we are only as strong as that union.

Personally I can see no reason for independence in the long term it benefits no one plus why rip asunder 411 years of tradition just because a very vocal minority are having one hell of a temper tantrum.

 

[Lenora]

And an article on topic.

" How can duchess of Alba become Queen of Scotland?" (Spanish Antena 3 Tv)

La Duquesa de Alba podría aspirar a ocupar el trono de una Escocia independiente - ANTENA 3 TV


Google Translate

 

[Cory]

Sovereign of Independent Scotland?

House of Stuart's Duchess of Alba could be next Queen of Scotland after independence vote | UK | News | Daily Express

 

[cepe]

Already got a thread started using this article - this is the link to the thread

http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f23/possible-scottish-independence-and-the-monarchy-36491.html

 

[Cris M]

I bet The Duchess of Alba is having a great laugh with all of this nonsense!!

 

[Cory]

Maybe HRH the Duke Franz of Bavaria and HRH Infanta Alicia of Bourbon have a better claim than the Duchess of Alba if we speak about Jacobite Line.