Scottish Independence: Queen's Role After Separation Questioned

Queen Scotland Rennie Salmond

PA/The Huffington Post UK   First Posted: 12/02/2012 07:15 Updated: 12/02/2012 08:06

Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Willie Rennie has written to the First Minister asking him to clarify the SNP's position on the role of the monarchy in an independent Scotland. The letter comes after reports the Queen herself was concerned about her place in a dramatically altered Britain.

Mr Rennie told Alex Salmond to clear up his party's stance on the issue because of a 1997 SNP agreement stating a referendum would be held on the question of whether or not to keep the Queen as head of state for Scotland within the term of office of the first independent parliament.

In his letter, Mr Rennie said there were "many questions" on Scotland's constitutional future he hoped would be debated "in full" in the coming months and years.

However, he urged Mr Salmond to "clear up" the monarchy issue in the week the Queen marked 60 years since coming to the throne. The Queen is said to have a warm relationship with the Scottish First Minister.

Mr Rennie said: "The debate over Scotland's future has intensified in recent weeks after both the UK and Scottish Governments launched their consultations.

"Many questions on Scotland's constitutional future have been laid at the SNP's door, which we so far have received very little detail on.

"One of these questions relates to the future of the monarchy in Scotland."

Mr Rennie added: "Alex Salmond has said that the monarch would continue to reign in Scotland but this goes directly against his own party policy set in 1997.

"He said that he would respect the wishes of his party on this matter and no vote has been held by the SNP on this issue since then.
"The First Minister should now come clean and tell us what his party's policy is."

A spokeswoman for the SNP said: "Willie Rennie has blundered in trying to drag Her Majesty into political debate. Policies passed by the Liberal Democrat conference in 1997 certainly do not reflect the policies they are pursuing now, in cahoots with the Tories.

"Only last Sunday, former Tory Prime Minister John Major - Willie Rennie's Westminster coalition partner - welcomed the SNP's long-standing policy for the Queen to be head of state of an independent Scotland. With independence, we will retain the 1603
Union of the Crowns, and forge a new relationship of equality between Scotland and England.

"Since the establishment of the Scottish Parliament in 1999, the SNP's policy is for a referendum on a White Paper setting out the full details of independence - which will be published in November 2013, with the referendum taking place in autumn 2014 - and will include the SNP's long-standing policy for the Queen and her successors to be head of state."

The intervention by Willie Rennie comes a day ahead of talks between Alex Salmond and the Scottish Secretary of the Westminster government, Michael Moore. The two men will attempt to iron out their differences over the timing and nature of the Scottish independence referendum.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST UK POLITICS

Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Willie Rennie has written to the First Minister asking him to clarify the SNP's position on the role of the monarchy in an independent Scotland. The letter comes aft...
Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Willie Rennie has written to the First Minister asking him to clarify the SNP's position on the role of the monarchy in an independent Scotland. The letter comes aft...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 177
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
13:19 on 07/03/2012
The vital role of Head of State.
By so doing the monarch denies the position to over ambitious or 'Has Been' corrupt politicians. In either case she is well worth the money. It may be symbolic but symbols matter in this PR dominated world and so we are helped by being protected from the depravations of the sub-humans who usually make it to the top of the greasy pole.
10:19 on 13/02/2012
Technically if she remained the Queen of Scotland, she would have to change her title to Queen Elizabeth the First of Scotland since Scotland surprisingly hasn't had a Queen named Elizabeth before our present one.
10:01 on 13/02/2012
Hopefully Scotland will retain Elizabeth II as Queen of Scots. I don't believe there is any real anomosity between the English and Scottish and it would be good to see some ties retained by the two nations. Old friendships die hard and I think the friendship between Scotland and the new UK will be die harder than many.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jimbraid1
10:21 on 13/02/2012
I think and hope that you are right Man of Kent. Some will of course argue that she is QE1 of Scotland but regardless of that I think Scots would perfer to have her as their monarch, not so sure what they will think when Charles takes the throne however, I dont think he has the same appeal as his mum.
08:30 on 13/02/2012
Many people are questioning the role of the Lib-Dems in Government at the same time!!!!!!
08:08 on 13/02/2012
The Queen should have as head of State the power to veto Scotland from breaking away from the Union with England
09:01 on 13/02/2012
In Scotland it is the Scots who decide, not their monach. Queen Elizabeth is Queen of Scots not Queen of Scotland. Here sovereignty has always rested with the people and if their monarch doesn't measure up to the job the people reserve the right to remove them and install someone else who will.
If it ever came to it fidgewadge, in England or Scotland if a constitutional monarch ever denied the will of the public then you would soon be living in a new republic quicker than you could say Sachs Coburg and Gotha.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
beenzrgud
Can't say what I'd like to here.
07:34 on 13/02/2012
It's clear that the Scots have thought for years than they get a raw deal from being in the UK. Regardless of what changes are made to their share of the pot I don't think the Scots will ever truly believe that the English aren't out to fleece them. For this reason I think that Scotland should leave the UK and that all ties should be broken including having the Queen as head of state. They should have their own currency, armed forces, and everything else associated with an independent country.
Maybe when they are totally separate they will stop them blaming the English for all things bad in Scotland, but I doubt it.
09:04 on 13/02/2012
No Scot blames the English people. When will English people get over that! Scots have blamed Governments and the polical systems. Too many English people want this to be a them and us situation. The sad fact is the English people have been turned over by these Governments just as much as the Scots, Welsh and Irish have, Look at the North and South England divide. It really exists. Oh, and read your history! The Union of Crowns saw a Scottish Monarch take over the English throne. The Queen is just as much a Scottish Queen as an English Queen (If not more so).
11:49 on 13/02/2012
Well said xini
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
beenzrgud
Can't say what I'd like to here.
13:41 on 13/02/2012
"them and us" has been the Scottish mantra for as long as I can remember. If we're all in this together how does what you're saying support the position of Scottish independence.
As for the Queen, if you want her then you can have her.
Come to think of perhaps it would be best if Alex Salmond just went to the treasury and took whatever he thought was fair, though I doubt that would leave much for anyone else, I also doubt you'd here any complaints from the Scots.
An even better idea is if Salmond just made a list of everything he thought Scotland was entitled to. That way the UK could be rid of the Scots all the more quicker. I've no doubt after the UK had been stripped of its assets we'd all be a lot poorer, but at least we wouldn't have to listen to any more Scottish nonsense.
02:48 on 13/02/2012
When the 1603 Union of the Crowns legislation was passed I don't suppose the people were asked about it. The Union of Crowns followed the death of James' of Scotland unmarried and childless first cousin twice removed, Queen Elizabeth I of England. It was stiched up by the intermarried heads of state between Scotland & England.
Why shouldn't it revert back? Whether Scotland becomes Independant will be an interesting debate but frankly condeming the change because it may affect the position of the Queen is irrelevant.
08:52 on 13/02/2012
The People as you put it until universal suffrage was introduced after the First World War were the landed few who owned their own property, the richer you were the more votes you had. The actual people who worked to make someone else rich had no voice or rights for 200 years after the Union .
My grandfather was sold to a farmer near Edinburgh as a slave, he had no rights no vote and no-where to call his own and no days off or holidays. It was not an unusual thing back then.

There was no legislation involved in 1603, the divine right of kings still ran in England until Cromwell cut the kings head off.

The 1707 Treaty of Union was stitched up with Queen Ann bribing a few bankrupt Scottish aristos in parliament to sign away their country's sovereignty. The ordinary people rioted in the streets for years after when they found out.
03:59 on 28/03/2012
?1Q
01:19 on 13/02/2012
The Queens role should be questioned full stop! She has no place in our political system. They should be allowed to exit our silly political system and a new constitution needs to be WRITTEN ON PAPER immediately!
03:59 on 13/02/2012
Absolutely
06:03 on 13/02/2012
i wish we didnt have the politicians we have in our political system, about the queen..well, if the scots want to be completely independent..then they dont get a right to have our queen either simple as that, but from what i can see its a few noisy Scots that are yelling about being "free", like theyre a colony or something. People need to give Scots a lot more credit,
13:32 on 13/02/2012
There would be no appetite for a "free" Scotland if Britain had a system where certain unalienable rights were secured by a government of the people. Our country is ruled by parties that gerrymander our choices of candidate and silence our right to protest. You cant even protest within a kilometre of parliament! Apparently our elected representatives don't like us registering our discontent or maybe its the un elected house of lords. Until we remove and repair the rot that has chewed away at our most important institution, Britain will fester and die. What other way is there than a considered penning of a new constitution!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
vividrick
I came, I saw...I had a cup of tea!
22:14 on 12/02/2012
...simple, a 'tourist'!
21:50 on 12/02/2012
If Scotland gains independence, it is only fair that Scotland should pay for all the unravelling of the intricate web that is now the present union of the four countries comprising Great Britain. The monarchy is only one issue. What about the Banker's debt to the Treasury? What about possessions overseas? What about our shared defence system? What about all the intricate civil service at home and overseas now shared between us? Who will own the numerous government buildings at home and overseas? It is all going to be a gigantic headache. But what does Alex Salmond care? As long he can say he is monarch of all he surveys - the big I Am.
22:27 on 12/02/2012
"If something is not immediately easy to do, that's because it aint worth doing"

Homer Simpson
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Fozwords
Abandon hope when you post on here
20:56 on 12/02/2012
If the Lib Dems want to question anything, they should question what useful purpoose they serve in politics, the answer is nothing, leave the Queen out of it and mend your own inadequacies first
19:42 on 12/02/2012
The scots can have her, free.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Fozwords
Abandon hope when you post on here
20:56 on 12/02/2012
I would rather they had you she is worth a million of you.
21:25 on 12/02/2012
Bisous to you too.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jillblnsky
23:47 on 12/02/2012
She isn't worth a million of anyone.
19:09 on 12/02/2012
Well I thought the monarch was shared for about a 100 years before the full union wasn't it?
17:55 on 12/02/2012
Will the Scots still be.. subjects .. if they go it alone ?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Fozwords
Abandon hope when you post on here
20:57 on 12/02/2012
Answer - they wont go it alone and they will still share her she is the Queen of all the United Kingdon
08:41 on 13/02/2012
Fozwords,
Your right The Queens position will not change. HM has a great respect for Scotland and goes to Balmoral whenever she can. It seems a shame to bring the monach into this tacky argument.
21:26 on 12/02/2012
We never have been subjects. You need to read more about Scots Law and the Treaty of the Union (`1707)
This comment has been removed.