The Queen will remain Head of State after Independence

So the official SNP line stands. But on today, this very special day... aye, it's a Monday and we've all just got the first working day of the week out the way. But seriously, today has been Accession Day. The day that King George VI died and Queen Elizabeth ascended (or should that be descended?) to the throne. So it seems appropriate to reflect on one or two issues.

Firstly, I should state clearly my belief that the current SNP position on this is entirely correct. The Republicans are satisfied by knowing that a referendum on the monarchy can be held at some point. Maybe that should be “will be held at some point.”, the reason that it is worth noting the two there is that I am making a presumption that the SNP will win an election after Independence and therefore be able to fulfil its policy commitments. It may well be that other parties contesting a Scottish General Election would not make such a commitment. At present the Scottish Unionist Parties leaders are so sycophantic that I doubt very much that they would.

There is no timetable set out at the moment for when the party foresees the monarchy/republic referendum. For the time being we are trying to get as many people on side for an Independence Yes vote as possible. If the thought of losing the Queen as Head of State puts anyone off voting Yes then it seems a relatively small concession to make. This movement's vision for independence is not impeded by having an unelected head of state. As long as we live in a parliamentary democracy then the country's legislation is decided upon by the people for the people. Therefore we can make all the social and legislative changes that we want. The ones that bring the various strands of the Scottish Independence movement together.

Secondly, and this follows on nicely from the point about parliamentary democracy, the Queen does very little. David Cameron said "Today is a day to pay tribute to the magnificent service of Her Majesty the Queen. With experience, dignity and quiet authority she has guided and united our nation and the Commonwealth over six varied decades." She has represented the State abroad and at home by attending hundreds, probably thousands of dinners, banquets, balls etc etc. She has given speeches honouring foreign dignitaries or fallen soldiers. It would be interesting to find out just how many of those speeches she has written herself. Before anyone points out that even the great First Minister has his speeches written for him, the difference is that politicians have earned their position by writing speeches for themselves over many years, normally. Before I veer too off track here back to the point about “service” and/or leadership. The whole point of a Constitutional Monarchy is that the monarch only performs ceremonial duties. She has never expressed her political opinions publicly. In what way does she lead? I really can't see it. To serve suggests that she has given up a lot to fulfil her responsibilities. But what? She has lived a full family life, visited more countries than most people I know will do in their lifetimes. She has engaged in all the recreational activities she has chosen to. Did she really want to teach under privileged children how to read and write? Or to be a renowned watercolour painter? Call me a cynic but I doubt it. So to sum up this point. She hasn't really served. She has just gone through the motions in a way that she was prepared (I mean that in herself and by other people) to do from the day she was born.

Thirdly, I have already talked about the vision this movement has of Independence. Republicanism goes hand in hand with that. We all know how to play a bit of politics and we all have to keep that in mind in this campaign. But, as unimportant as she is, the symbolism of having an unelected head of state is quite simply wrong. For anyone to have such grotesque levels of wealth and privilege is nothing short of abhorrent. For me it goes against everything We all stand for. Scotland will not become a wealthier place by luck. It will be done by work. Damn hard work. Lizzy didn't need to work. She was just lucky. I wanted to say more here on this point. But I'm struggling a little. Nothing to do with the time of night. It's because opposition to an unelected head of state and support for a republic is a maxim for me. I struggle to see how any educated democrat, and certainly any left leaning person, could support a system where someone becomes head of state by accident of birth.

So as we can finish on a positive note I can put the minds of all Independence supporting Republicans as ease. Since 1990 there have been 34 “new countries”. Not one of them has a monarchy, constitutional or otherwise. The SNP are playing a wise game indeed. Trust them on this. Precedent is certainly on OUR side.