independent scotland ? who gets to keep the queen?

The loss of oil revenue is the reason that Scotland is subsidising massive wind turbines all over the country at such a great rate. Objections from local councils, and conservation groups, are over-ruled because Fergus Ewing, the minister in charge of the environment, is also responsible for energy (and tourism).

The Union flag would need to be redesigned and brought up to date with the removal of the Scottish cross and the Irish cross though it would be a bit plain looking unless the Welsh and N.I flag were added in.

No, the islands are legally 'Scottish'...(if we're talking about Shetland; Orkney and the Western Isles) and would go with an independent Scotland (if independence ever became a reality - and on current stats it would seem unlikely).

In terms of International Law, the oil lies off the Scottish coast and as such should belong to Scotland. So, oil revenue should rightfully belong to Scotland. BUT a) there will be a tiresome legal battle in relation to this and b) revenue from oil is predicted to fall - so it may well be a pyrrhic victory for whoever finally was able to claim ownership.

I'm interested in arguments about the Crown estates; the size of Scotland's share of the current public finance deficit; what happens to defence...and etc...

4 of these 14 are the more serious contenders en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Competitors_for_the_Crown_of_Scotland

I think there's also the North Sea oil issue what is left of the oil... haven't the islands said they wouldn't devolve and would stay with England, which means Scotland would be free but without its oil revenue?

Interesting that none of you actually took the time to go consult the SNP manifesto on 'what happens post-independence'... ;-)
SNP propose to retain the Queen as Head of State for Scotland - in much the same way that Oz did...
I'd rather we got rid of her (and the hangers on) personally but...

We could flog our share of her on Ebay and assume resumption on the Crown Estates.

Civil lust sounds good to me, TheCoalition.

My phone seems to know something about the civil list that I don't.

Dylthan - there is no such thing as a right to rule. You can't lose something that didn't exist.

They can have her and pay the civil lust as long as we get to keep the crown estates.

Dylthan I agree :)

Oh Scotland can have the queen. It's a great sacrifice, but it's the least we can do.

That's interesting rustybear I didn't know that the Stuart line still existed although buggering off without even putting up any sort of fight for your country and then years later waltzing back expecting to have your crown back and in the process causing hundreds to die under your name before skulking off with your tail between your legs makes me feel they have well and truly lost their right to rule.

Op I don't think the majority of Scottish people base their political choices on a film I think what caused the majority of Scotland to re think the discussion on independance is that fact that in the main British election the conservatives only got one seat in Scotland yet they are in charge of the country something about that just dosn't sit right for me.

Maybe we could have an x factor like competition to find a Scottish royal family

I think with the monarchy, all options are always open. It has constantly shown itself willing to innovate 'tradition' in any way that suits its continuing survival. She could be queen of an independent scotland or not, or Honorary Empress of Balmoral, just according to whatever trinketry was the smoothest solution.

I imagine though that the seccession of Scotland is nominally in her gift? That she i.e. in effect the UK govt has to sign off Scotland's exit. Scotland has no constitutional power to bugger off, and the referendum would just create a political necessity for the UK to pass a law 'setting it free'?

As an English person, I'm happy either way: I like being in a family of UK nations, but if Scotland wanted out, we would still be sister-nations under the European Union.

I think it's time to ditch the monarchy - let's have a head of state who is elected and accountable.

Actually Queen Elizabeth can still trace a direct line of descent from William I if you go through the female line (and England has never had a Salic Law excluding females from either inheriting the throne or transmitting a claim), so the 'English Royals' haven't really died out (assuming you define William I as 'English' of course!)

If Scotland becomes independent they would remain a monarchy, just as Australia has, unless and until the Scottish Parliament decided otherwise,

But if they did want their 'own' monarch, perhaps they could take the Jacobite line that all the monarchs since George I are usurpers and invite the current Head of the House of Stuart - Duke Franz of Bavaria - to take the throne.

We could redesign the Union Flag to omit the scottish element. It would end up being two red crosses on a white background. :)

Oh how disappointing. I'm looking for a country retreat

Balmoral was purchased by Queen Victoria, so would continue to be owned by the Royal family. I think the same would apply to the Castle of Mey. There would be a better case for the Scots taking ownership ofHolyrood Palace, as the historic seat of the Scottish Royal family. But if the Queen stayed as head of state, then it would probably still continue to be available for her use.

I think a far more interesting question is "Who get's to keep Balmoral?"

I learned all this for the Commonwealth Knowledge badge at Guides. Not much has changed, except the joining of the Commonwealth by Mozambique, the first country to do so which was never a part of the a British Empire.

It was only when I was typing about the Aussie referendum that I remembered that she is Queen of a number of other places too.

All those places are in the Commonwealth, but so are a load of places where HMQ is not monarch eg India (there are 54 countries in the Commonwealth, whereas she's monarch to UK plus the 15 above).