IN the wake of the Norstat/Believe in Scotland poll, which appears to show that a commitment to abolish the monarchy in an independent Scotland would boost Yes support by five percentage points, there has been considerable social media pressure on the SNP to embrace republicanism as a quick fix. The problem is, though, that any idea that outright hostility to the monarchy would be helpful to the independence cause, let alone that it would drive the Yes vote to the giddy heights of 59%, makes no logical sense.
There is still considerable support for the royal family in Scotland. For example a Lord Ashcroft poll in March 2023 showed that 46% of the Scottish public want to keep King Charles as head of state, and that 38% would feel the same way even if Scotland becomes independent. Given that we know almost for certain that the UK will be retaining the monarchy regardless of whether Scotland goes its own way, the obvious danger is that nearly four in 10 voters would become out of bounds for any republican-flavoured Yes campaign, because monarchists would be clear that the only way of keeping their preferred head of state is to stick with the UK.
In practice it wouldn't be quite as bad as that, because not all supporters of the royal family feel particularly strongly about the issue. But a significant minority of voters would undoubtedly be alienated, and there must be a question mark over the wisdom of the independence movement choosing to make life more difficult for itself than was the case in 2014. In the first independence referendum, pro-royal voters could vote Yes safe in the knowledge that an indy Scotland might well keep the monarchy in exactly the same way that former colonies such as New Zealand have chosen to do.
The counter-argument that may be made by those who think the Norstat poll should be taken seriously is that voters will only come over to Yes if they think independence will make a radical difference. Republican voters might only feel inspired enough to back Yes if they are convinced that the King will really be removed. But if you think of all the revolutionary changes that independence would potentially bring about, such as the indefinite abolition of Tory rule, the removal of nuclear weapons from the Clyde, and the recognition of Palestinian statehood by an independent Scotland, it seems somewhat implausible that the issue of a ceremonial monarchy dwarfs all of that and would be a deal-breaker for the most radical voters.
If the Norstat poll result is misleading, how did it come about? It's actually well understood in the polling industry that hypothetical questions, asking how respondents would vote in response to a question if certain specific conditions apply, often produce wildly unreliable results. The reason is probably that some respondents focus more on the "certain specific conditions", in this case abolishing the monarchy, than they do on the main question, in this case independence.
If in the real world the SNP were to adopt a republican policy tomorrow, many republican voters would continue to weigh up the issue of independence on its own merits, meaning that the 59% Yes vote would be unlikely to be replicated in standard independence polling.
