Scottish vote puts focus on future of monarchy

The way Greg Cross sees it, a vote for independence in Scotland’s referendum could be a killer blow for the British monarchy north of the English border.

“Eventually, the republicans would hold sway and they would replace them with some presidential creature who would cost twice as much,” said Mr Cross, a resident of the northern Scottish village of Braemar, 15km up the road from the Queen’s Highland residence of Balmoral.

A few kilometres further down the forest and heather-clad glen, a businessman in the village of Ballater is even blunter on the impact of independence on the monarchy – and on the economy of an area long supported by royalty’s lustre.

“If Scotland was independent, it would be a socialist republic – that would finish the Queen, it would finish Braemar and it would finish Ballater,” the businessman said.

Such trenchant views cut sharply against the vision offered by Alex Salmond, Scotland’s first minister and leader of the Scottish National party.

The Scottish government insists an independent Scotland would continue to be a constitutional monarchy under Queen Elizabeth and her heirs – noting that the crowns of Scotland and England were united in 1603, a century before their parliaments combined in 1707.

A Yes vote on September 18 would certainly raise far-reaching questions for the royal family. A new written constitution for an independent Scotland would at the least require a codifying of the monarchy’s constitutional role and potentially controversial haggling over the Scottish contribution to its expenses.

But Mr Salmond has been at pains to reassure royalists.

In an interview in GQ magazine last month, Mr Salmond said he personally liked the Queen and Prince Charles – whom he prefers to refer to by his Scottish title of the Duke of Rothesay and whose advice he says he values on issues ranging from agriculture and the environment to architecture.

The first minister’s position reflects in part determination not to undermine the cause of independence by alienating the many voters in Scotland who support a monarchy that has enthusiastically embraced Scottish trappings since the 19th century.

That embrace is symbolised by Balmoral Castle, the tartan-heavy Highland home built for Queen Victoria in the 19th century and still the royal family’s summer refuge.

Despite a reportedly unhappy education at a Scottish boarding school, Prince Charles has continued the tradition of stressing his Caledonian connections – including making the kilt a much more habitual part of his dress code than do all but a tiny handful of Scots.

“He has a genuine love of Scotland. The Scotland that he loves may not be real, and certainly not typical, but that doesn't make his affection for it any less sincere,” wrote Mr Salmond after a 1998 private meeting with the kilt-clad prince.

Yet businessmen in the villages around Balmoral are not the only ones who think independence could open the door to a future without the monarchy.

FT Video

Scotland: Deciding its destiny

January 2014: In part one of a three-part series, the FT’s John McDermott takes a road trip to his homeland to find out how Scots are feeling about the prospect of independence ahead of this year’s referendum

The chairman of Yes Scotland, the cross-party campaign for independence, said last year that if Scotland left the UK, voters should have an “early opportunity” to decide if they wanted to retain the monarchy.

“A hereditary head of state is an affront to democracy and a complete anachronism in a modern 21st century democracy,” said Dennis Canavan, a former Labour MP.

Many in Mr Salmond’s SNP are also strong republicans who quietly support such calls – in 1997 a party conference voted in favour of a referendum on abolition of the monarchy – and would certainly become more vocal if independence were secured.

With polls suggesting that Scottish republicans are very much in the minority, such views might not prevail. But even in Balmoral’s Highland hinterland, some are comfortable with the idea of a future without the royals.

“We don’t need them,” said Carol Williams, resident of Aboyne village. “A lot of money is thrown at the Queen and her hangers-on, and I don’t think they do very much for it.”

A 700-year royal history of Scotland

1314 Robert the Bruce’s victory over England’s Edward II at Bannockburn secures the independence of the Scottish kingdom

1603 On the death of England’s Queen Elizabeth, Scotland’s James VI moves to London and becomes king of both nations

1707 The English and Scottish parliaments vote to unite the two countries into a single kingdom of Great Britain reigned over by Queen Anne

1746 A government force including Scots soldiers secures the Hanoverian throne by defeating the mainly Highland Scottish army of Prince Charles Edward Stuart at the Battle of Culloden

1852 Prince Albert buys Balmoral in the Scottish Highlands for Queen Victoria and the estate becomes an emblem of the royal family’s ties to Scotland