Towards the end of this article in the Herald Scotland (http://www.heraldscotland.com/mobile/politics/political-news/galloway-attacked-for-snp-catholic-slur.21116305?_=ae30b8a933a78e2172be69dea63c7fb56e0d0b37) I noticed something which may prove to be of momentous significance. Here is the quotation:-
"SNP MSP Bob Doris said:- "It is the Westminster Parliament .... which institutionally discriminates against Catholics in the Act of Settlement – discrimination which an independent Scotland can and will consign to the dustbin of history in a written constitution for the 21st century."
The Act of Settlement is the law which governs who can be crowned Monarch. In a way you might say the comment shows that the SNP are now committed to maintaining the Monarchy. When I first met anybody with influence within the SNP I did point out that, by their then wholly republican stance, they were alienating support. I suggested that they talked about maintaining the Monarchy and retaining the unity of the Crown as a social union. I suggested if they did then their support was likely to be enhanced. I was therefore pleased when my suggestion seemed to be acted upon and feel sure that the decision to do so has helped them up till now.
However what is suggested by the above words is rather more radical than might appear at first appear.
Consider for a moment the British Government’s recent tinkering with the Act of Settlement. Here is an article which explains some of the detail.
In round terms we will now have, if and when all the Commonwealth governments adopt it, a significant change to the rule excluding Roman Catholics.
A Roman Catholic will not be able to actually become King or Queen but could marry a Roman Catholic as long as their children are Church of England, then they still can be in the line of succession to potentially become King or Queen. Not all the Commonwealth governments have as yet ratified this so therefore this Act has not yet come into force, although it has been passed by the Westminster Parliament.
If the above quotation is accurate it would appear however that the SNP intend to adopt a different rule which allows for an actual practising Catholic to be Monarch.
It should be remembered that the only reason that a relatively obscure German princely family from Hanover, and then subsequently an even more obscure princely family from Saxe-coberg became our Royal Family is because of the Protestant succession. Indeed George I (originally the elector Georg Ludwig of Hanover) was placed something like 40th in the normal line of hereditary succession to the throne. All the others before him who were Catholics were excluded by the Act of Settlement. Indeed the senior line of succession for both the Crowns of England and of Scotland continued and arguably continue to this day in the Stuart family.
This comment by the SNP therefore opens up the prospect of a restoration of the Stuarts to the throne of Scotland. It is perhaps even more surprising that the comment suggests that an independent Scotland, by pursuing a separate line of succession, would cease to be members of the Commonwealth.
I wonder if this is what was really meant, or whether this is merely indicative of a lackadaisical and casual ignorance of their significance? If the latter then it may bring a storm down on the ears of Mr Doris. What do you think?
Whatever you might think about Queen Elizabeth, it is most unlikely that she will be replaced on the throne of an independent Scotland by a Stuart. The proposal would be too divisive. A republic is a more likely prospect.
ReplyDeleteCharles Stuart, the young pretender, had no interest in acquiring the throne of a separate Scotland. His intention was to be the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.
I can't see why the chairman has posted this blog.
ReplyDeleteThere are matters of real concern such as the mishandling of the economy by Osborne to worry about, and what the English Democrats would do.
ps Michael Gove, Cameron's Scottish Secretary of State for Education has said that England should have its own school curriculum distinct from Wales and Northern Ireland (Scotland has always had a different curriculum and its own school examinations). Now that is something which does matter to the English
I wish the chairman's blog would deal matters that are important to the majority of English folk, i.e., the bread and butter issues of the economy, employment, pensions, education, the NHS.
The possibility of the Scots being ruled by a Stuart is romantic nonsense straight from the imagination of Sir Walter Scot. It is not worth a minute's consideration.
It does point out the growing sense that the nationalist cause in Scotland cause is posturing merely to acquire more funds from the English exchequer. Salmond knows full well that he would lose the vote on independence. I hope he does, the result of victory or growing the threat of it would be a tsunami of English money by the British government to maintain the union. That is all he wants. The Scot Nats had a 'penny in the pound'( tax increase) campaign to fund an independent Scotland a few years ago, the result was electoral disappointment. From that point Salmond knew true independence with tax raising being a necessary evil would kill the romanticism of the England free utopia his supporters dream for. He needs the anti English sentiment institutional in the Scottish psyche to maintain the fantasy. Hence the lender of last resort will remain the bank of England if independence is won.
DeleteIn either outcome it will be bad for the English, one way or another we will have to underwrite or fund a bigger splash of cash to our Grampian cousins.
What we need is an independent England that can decide whether we want a union with Scotland or not.
The British establishment has connived to keep the English voice from the debate about devolution completely. Time to demand it for ourselves, on our own terms.
Robin,
ReplyDeleteWhy don't you concentrate on the 'People's Priorities' - the economy, employment, immigration, loss of national identity, pensions, education, the NHS, social care, the Royal Mail?
The latter
ReplyDeleteI remember reading a few years ago that republicanism was at its strongest in Scotland, despite Princess Anne's unwavering support for the Scotland rugby team. So I think you are right, Scotland will become a republic. I have no doubt that the EU and the New World Order will now try hard to removing the remaining European royal families. In Norway the royal family have been disestablished making Christianity no longer the official state religion. However, as the recent swearing in of the new Dutch king and our queen's diamond jubilee showed support for royalty is going to be a tough nut to crack. In Holland, 250,000 lined the streets to cheer Willem Alexander and only one hundred republicans turned out to boo.
ReplyDelete