Keep the royal family – but they must evolve with the times

heraldscotland.com · Feb 26, 2026 · Collected from GDELT

Full Article

WITH the UK’s respect for traditions, it is only natural that we observe that Bible of parliamentary procedure, Thomas Erskine May’s treatise on parliamentary practise, and remain a monarchy instead of becoming a republic. However, recent events surrounding the royal family suggest it is vital to look anew at the part it plays in the life of the UK, ensuring that its evolution is in line with the demands of a modern democracy. In this day and age the servility of subjects to a monarch is no longer appropriate. Rather everyone, regardless of rank or wealth, must live under the law of the land, and be treated equally, according to the strictures of that law. It is time that the privileges accorded to members of our so-called ruling family were removed to make it more streamlined, with remaining members truly public servants, receiving salaries for public duties they perform on behalf of the state. In this capacity members would continue to perform ceremonial duties associated with their positions as honorary heads of state, acting as representatives of the UK in visits abroad, and receiving visiting foreign dignitaries. They would smooth the diplomatic path between nations using this form of soft power. While the truncated royal family would retain its position in those areas, the supernumerary royals would no longer be supported by funds from the public purse. They would be expected to earn a living under their own steam, thus ensuring they don’t become a burden on the state, until circumstances demand that they are called upon to carry out duties in the capacities previously outlined. Those dedicated to the service of the state would not be allowed to retain the mystique which currently surrounds fully active royal family members. They would be accountable, and face media scrutiny without the special restrictions currently accorded them. Also, they would appear before parliamentary committees on a regular basis to answer questions considered relevant in relation to their public activities. A full account of their expenses and earnings in public capacities should be made known and considered taxable, in the same way every other citizen is treated by HMRC. Active royals carry out work beneficial to the UK, much like many other workers, so they should expect to conform to the rules and regulations under which every citizen operates. Such an evolution, as described, would allow us to maintain the facade of monarchy. It would respect the traditions of the office, meaning there would be no need for the UK to become a republic, with an honorary elected president carrying out many soft power duties. Denis Bruce, Bishopbriggs. More letters... Roadmaps out of lockdown ignore the very real problems millions will face in months to come King Charles should dip into his fortune to help Britain's poorest Keir Starmer's Trump Mini-Me act is an utter disgrace Scotland’s flood risk Eight hundred thousand homes in the UK are at risk of flooding by 2080. It’s claimed that almost half will be in Scotland. As parts of England have many homes already built in inappropriate sites and at flood risk, I find this report (from a Scottish perspective) literally unbelievable. Rainfall will certainly increase with global warming, and where it will fall exactly over a 50 year span is difficult to guess. But many Scottish towns and villages are not built on flood plains, so they won’t be as affected by the inevitable rising seas. Whitesands in Dumfries has regularly flooded all my life (I’m 76 years old) and, along with other low-lying areas, requires flood prevention. But we have time to enact the correct measures and ensure that new houses are built in safe locations. GR Weir, Ochiltree. Bulldoze energy policy Just when we thought the environmental damage couldn’t get any worse… Your correspondent advocating pumped storage and claiming it is ‘renewable energy’ is quite simply wrong (Herald Letters, February 17). Pumped ‘storage’ is by definition NOT renewable energy. This erroneous belief demonstrates perfectly the hidden environmental and financial costs, and how utterly useless hundreds of giant, short-lived, industrial wind turbines carpeting our hills, and now seas, are at providing constant, reliable energy, as and when required. For example, the concrete required in hydro ‘storage’ plants, for a paltry few minutes of back-up energy, is 18 times greater than a Nuclear plant, which provides constant, baseload power, day in day out, 365 days a year. Nuclear Plants in the UK require 2,025 times less land than wind farms, sorry subsidy farms, because that’s what they really are. Remember how dry last Summer was? Water was a very scarce commodity. Scotland's scenic grandeur, and the Great Glen, should be permanently protected for us and our children to inherit. It really is the beating heart of our tourist industry, and ought not to be trashed any further by bulldozers and pylons, because of an ill-thought-out energy policy. George Herraghty, Moray. Anas Sarwar is right to try and guide the PM in a new direction. (Image: NQ) Challenging PM’s record should be encouraged I write regarding criticisms made by Anas Sarwar of Sir Keir Starmer. It should be accepted that Sir Keir ran a brilliant general election campaign, addressing the worst UK national debt since 1945. He didn’t tell lies or make false promises, and was clear that tough financial decisions were unavoidable, and would take years to fully implement. Once Labour was elected, with a large majority, the electorate forgot this. One half of them wanted more benefits, the other half wanted less tax. Which was never realistic. Sir Keir understood how to right some wrongs, where there was a sound legal case, including tackling the post office and infected blood scandals, where justice was denied by previous governments. Also long-standing concerns over coal workers pensions was at last addressed. As time went on it was clear that there must be some amelioration of harsh financial policies, which was all well and good. However, a Prime Minister has to be a politician as well as a lawyer, and the polls turned badly - perhaps unfairly - against Sir Keir. Worse was to come, with a series of misjudgements and apologies, particularly relating to appointments to high office. Sir Keir should think hard before acting on future appointees. Politics is not a cosy occupation, it’s tough and competitive. And Labour’s Scottish leader, Anas Sarwar, is tough, competitive and challenging. Scottish Labour never was a mere ‘branch office’, which is something only empty heads say when they cannot muster any other criticism. It’s only right that Mr Sarwar should challenge the PM on policies that are bad for Scotland, despite the extra funding given to the Scottish Government. Policies including the banning of new licences for the exploration of potential oil and gas reserves, while continuing importations from across the ocean. This isn’t just environmentally illiterate – it’s bad news for Scottish jobs and incomes. Meanwhile, renewable energy is claimed to be cheap. However, Scotland produces more than the rest of the UK, yet our prices are higher, and the policy of zonal pricing was rejected by the UK Government. Which is bad for Scotland. After the foolish Brexit referendum we must get closer to Europe again, though this could mean giving away fishing rights, which will certainly be bad for Scotland. In conclusion, Mr Sarwar is right to challenge Sir Keir Starmer, regarding his effectiveness, while Sir Keir must address those challenges, and make the necessary policy changes. Ralph Barker, Crawford.