THE most recent and authoritative polling on British attitudes to the monarchy was published by Focaldata in March this year. The sample of voters consulted was unusually large at 10,000, polling took place several months after the death of the highly respected Queen Elizabeth and the pollsters drilled down to estimate attitudes in UK parliamentary constituencies, excluding those in Northern Ireland. As a snapshot of current attitudes to monarchy in spring 2023 at national, regional and local level, it could hardly be bettered.
The headline figure indicates that 55% of respondents agree the monarchy is good for Britain, with 30% agreeing strongly, 18% disagreeing while 26% are uncertain.
The distinctive feature is in Scotland where support for the monarchy stands at 45% and 36% prefer a republic with an elected head of state. That Scotland is more sceptical than other UK nations about monarchy has been apparent from several other polls over recent years. Indeed, in this March 2023 analysis, no less than 53 of the top 100 sceptical seats on monarchy are north of the Border, a remarkable finding given that there are only 59 constituencies in all in Scotland.
Exactly when this pattern first emerged cannot easily be determined since opinion polls on Scotland’s attitudes to monarchy do not reach back far enough in time to provide the necessary data. Certainly press reports on the coronation celebrations of 1953 suggest that they were just as popular and enjoyed in Scotland as in other parts of the UK.
This was a time of course when the SNP was more of a sect than a potent political force and independence had not yet become a national cause but remained a peculiar eccentricity with a tiny number of followers.
One important piece of evidence in the 2023 data might provide a route to explanation of later Scottish distinctiveness in attitudes to royalty. The analysis showed that monarchists are much more likely to be Conservatives in the UK with 75% in favour of royalty and 9% against. Looking back to the 1950s, Scotland was little different from the rest of the UK in the appeal of the two big parties of that era. Indeed in 1959, the Conservatives won an overall majority in Scotland in the General Election of that year.
READ MORE: Local election results suggest Labour need SNP to form government
Crucially however, that was the high water mark of Tory popularity north of the Border.
It should also be remembered that monarchy is a British institution and Britishness, while having continuing appeal in Scotland, has been challenged by nationalism and the rise of a much stronger sense of “cultural” Scottishness.
A Panelbase poll in June 2021 reported, for instance, that among those backing Scottish independence, only 26% wanted a monarchy while 60% supported a republic. Equally, only a quarter of those who claim to be Scottish and not British wanted the Head of State to be a monarch. Unionists, on the other hand, were much more sympathetic to monarchy.
The distinctive Scottish attitudes to royalty within the UK are likely therefore to be largely explained over the last 60 years or so by a movement to the moderate left in party loyalties, erosion of the conservative vote, the increase in a sense of Scottishness in national identity, the rise of nationalism and the continuing prominence of the Scottish question in politics.
The late Elizabeth gained respect from both unionists and nationalists partly because,unlike some recent UK prime ministers, she recognised that Scotland was a historic nation and publicly articulated that sentiment. Her son would be advised to do likewise if he is to continue to secure his northern kingdom.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
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 here