CHRIS Moncrieff doesn’t seem to pay attention to what, according to clear statements by all the political figures involved, independence for Scotland could mean (The Press, September 17).
I wonder whether he even reads the newspapers? If Scotland has voted “Yes” to independence by this morning, it will indeed become “a foreign country” to him, to me and most of his readers.
However, this will not apply to the Queen, who may have feelings about the separation between Scotland and the rest of the UK, if it happens, but certainly won’t have to avoid Balmoral.
There are no proposals for Scotland to opt for another head of state or to become a republic. That may change in the future, perhaps.
Elizabeth will still be Queen of Scotland, just as the King or Queen of England was also the Scottish monarch between 1603 and the Act of Union which created one state out of two in 1707. For a parliamentary correspondent, Mr Moncrieff seems strangely ill-informed.
Chris Walker-Lyne, Millfield Road, York.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel