Does the Queen hate Scotland?

Following the passing of the EU Withdrawal Bill at Westminster, the bill was sent to the Queen for Royal Assent, as is normal.  Except, in this case, there was something a bit different.  Of the four administrations in the UK, Westminster and the three devolved administrations in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, only one, Westminster, was in favour.  The other three administrations debated the bill and all three refused to approve it in its current form.

As this bill made changes to the devolved powers of all three administrations, the Sewel Convention should apply.  It states that changes to the powers of a devolved administration should not be made without the consent of the devolved administration, the intention being that negotiations between Westminster and the devolved administration would follow to reach agreement on the change.  However, recently, Westminster have chosen not to respect the Sewell Convention and clauses in the EU Withdrawal bill make it clear that the opinions of the devolved administrations will always be ignored.  So Westminster passed the bill without taking the refusal of the devolved administrations into account.

Anyway, back to Royal Assent.  The Queen was now presented with a bill passed by Westminster against the wishes of the other three administrations.  So what to do?  Some say that she has no option but to give assent to any bill presented to her, though if that was true, what’s the point of Royal Assent if the Queen has no choice?  Some say that refusal to assent would create a constitutional crisis.  But what have we got at the moment if not a constitutional crisis, when three of the four constituent parts of the United Kingdom disagree with a bill passed by Westminster.  In any case, in Scotland’s case, as Queen of Scots, does she not have a duty of care to her subjects in Scotland.

So, if there is any truth in Royal Assent, the Queen had two choices.  Either she gave Royal Assent to the bill as it stood, ignoring the opinions of three of the four parts of her realm, or she asks Westminster to speak to the devolved administrations to try to reach some kind of agreement.  As we all know now, she chose the first option, choosing to ignore the wishes of three-quarters of the (so-called) United Kingdom.  Does she think they don’t really count?  Is this just a pretend ‘union’?  Is English opinion all that matters in this United Kingdom?  Westminster is, of course, a de-facto English parliament as English MPs hold an overwhelming majority over all others combined, So they can do what they like, as is only too well demonstrated by the passing of the EU Withdrawal Bill.

So now to the Scottish part.  In Scotland, the people are sovereign, and as stated in the Arbroath Declaration and as reaffirmed innumerable times since, the people have the power to elect their King (or Queen), and should that ruler do something which harms the people of Scotland, they have the power to remove that King (or Queen).  Thinking about current events, few economists, except the lunatic Brexiteer fringe, believe Brexit will not do serious damage to Scotland’s economy, so it can be argued that the Queen (of Scots), having signed into law this bill against the expressed wishes of the Scottish people, has crossed the line.

What do you think?

12 thoughts on “Does the Queen hate Scotland?

  1. Oh, come on Weegie. Her title is Queen Elizabeth the Second. Yes, the Second. Doesn’t that tell you all you need to know? Remember, according the Attorney General, Scotland was extinguished after England signed the “Act” of Union.
    An English friend, in Spain, asked me “I don’t understand all this Scotland business. When did it stop all being just England?”, and she was born and brought up in Newcastle, not the south.
    We are England’s plaything.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. By claiming the sovereignty of the English Parliament of the UK over Scotland, have the Tories broken the Treaty of Union? By signing the Act of Parliament that includes Westminster’s claim of Sovereignty over Scotland, has the Queen broken the Treaty of Union? If this is what has happened then the Scottish MPs need to withdraw from Westminster, meet with the Holyrood Parliament, resile the Treaty of Union with England, depose the Queen, close the offices of the British Government in Scotland, station police at the doors to prevent workers from entering, hold a confirmatory referendum, and then engage all the business of an independent state.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. Rather than speculate as to her like or dislike of Scotland, i suggest that she is locked into centuries old thinking. The Royals are well behind the times as is Johnson. An antiquated system of government totally disjointed has led to a public school buffoon secure in his own material comfort to play silly b… with the future of many. The seriousness of these antics are not seen by this idiot government. In these matters the Royals are irrelevant merely a tourist and media curiousity.
    Johnson sees the resurrection of Merry olde England with him as the jolly dictator, crown and all.
    Jolly good jape you know, a Peter Ustinoff character as the jolly monarch of his childhood.
    The sequel is horror, but reality.


    1. I agree it’s an antiquated system of government, but it’s the one we’ve got. As all parts of the UK except England were against the Withdrawal bill, it shows clearly that only England and English opinion counts. We need to leave England to the mess of their own making.


  4. The devolved nations are against it only the west minster voted for it that’s 3to one that’s illegal that’s because were colony’s not countries

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s