HARVIE ACCUSED OF TRYING TO "GAME" VOTERS WITH DOG-WHISTLE POLITICS

Patrick Harvie was criticised by opponents for trying to game voters with the "most pathetic type" of dog-whistle politics, after calling for the monarchy to be dumped in a theoretic independent Scottish state.

The Scottish Greens said the monarchy would “hold Scotland back” if the country wins its independence in the near future – saying that the Royal Family is an “outdated” and “discredited” system that should be replaced by a democratically-elected head of state, in a pitch that does seem to have a fair bit of traction with Scots.

Any lingering fondness some Scots may have had for the monarchy seems to have been jaundiced by the Queen's agreement to acquiesce to David Cameron's request in 2014, when he asked her to "arch an eyebrow" at Scots considering voting for their independence.

Joint convener of the Scottish Greens, Harvie, has spoken out following the row engulfing the Royal Family over the last week.

In a television interview, the Duke & Duchess of Sussex accused other (senior) members of the Royal Family of racism, which led to Prince William yesterday rejecting the allegation by insisting that: “we’re very much not a racist family”.

The Duchess also told how she was denied mental health support by the Royal Family. However, this has been disputed by the monarchy.

Ahead of the 2014 independence poll, the then SNP leader Alex Salmond insisted that the Queen would remain “Queen of Scots” if Scotland had won its independence –  stressing that the union of the crowns predated the union of the parliaments by 104 years and as such was a totally different issue to the matter of parliamentary independence.

However, it is understood that a great number of Scots and indeed SNP members don't necessarily share in Salmond's views, leading to Patrick Harvie looking to capitalise electorally by calling for any plans for Scotland going forward to include a democratically-elected head of state, instead of the monarchy, in an issue that promises to be a potential powderkeg if the country opts to take the responsibility for its own government back from London.

He said: "The revelations from the last few days, and other recent scandals, raise serious questions about the attitudes and values of the Royal Family and those around them. They also serve as a reminder that the monarchy itself is an outdated, discredited and totally undemocratic institution.

"As we look to the future that Scotland can have as a fairer, greener and independent country, it is clear that asking the people to choose a modern, democratically accountable head of state would be the best step forward.”

Mr Harvie added: “The idea that any family has the right to such status based on hereditary titles and unearned wealth would hold Scotland back, and it’s not one that the Scottish Greens will ever support.

“Their shooting and hunting estates can be put to better use serving the local communities and creating more jobs.

“The Scotland that we want to build is one that will challenge entrenched inequality and privilege, not put it right at the heart of power."

Scottish Conservative MSP, Murdo Fraser, has labelled the stance be the Greens as "illogical nonsense".

He said: "The monarchy is one of our most loved and respected institutions and that is still widely recognised across Scotland.

“Patrick Harvie is indulging in the most pathetic type of politics in a shameless bid to pander to republican voters who might be tempted to vote for his party."

Mr Fraser added: “The vast majority of Scots will recognise this patronising attempt to woo the electorate and see right through the Greens illogical nonsense. The benefits of having a constitutional monarchy as opposed to an elected politician as head of state are overwhelming.

“Patrick Harvie would be best served by actually focusing on environmental matters for once rather than spending his time obsessing about getting rid of the Royal Family.”

However, Fraser was invited to take his own advice and attempt to formulate even one policy that may help Scots in the most crucial election in history, as opposed to obsessing about whether the country's First Minister knew about something some weeks before she said she did.

Critics have suggested that this wasn't going to change what happened anyway. With one well known political commentator saying online: "The First Minister was always going to allow the investigation to run anyway, much to her predecessor's chagrin, it is he who attempted to spark a witch hunt against the her, before shamefully projecting his antics onto the object of his ire.

"Salmond and the Tories were the only parties who would benefit from taking down the country's leader. The Tories for obvious reasons, Salmond, for revenge, because the FM would not allow these complaints about him to be swept quietly under the carpet. The SNP and the wider independence movement has none other than Alex Salmond to thank for falling poll numbers. The irony meter is off the charts."

The latest poll conducted on behalf of the Scotsman newspaper has shown that a majority of Scots (54%) believed the First Minister to have been telling the truth at the Salmond inquiry, over twice as many (26%) as thought Salmond was being honest, with 20% on the fence. 

Broken down by party support, the Tories were out of step with the rest of the parties, with 60% of them prepared to accept Salmond's version of events, with a majority of Labour voters and over 78% of SNP voters opting to back the First Minister.

Associate director for Savanta ComRes, Chris Hopkins said the full impact of the inquiry isn't likely to be seen til further down the line. He said: "With half of the public more inclined to believe the First Minister, including a majority of Labour voters, and only a fifth of 2014 No voters less likely to support independence because of the saga, its impact on the First Minister doesn’t look to be catastrophic. Something that will be particularly hard for the Tories to digest, they have invested so much energy into trying to put a smell on the country's First Minister, they must be wondering what else they need to do.

Not attacking Romany Gypsies, reversing their regrettable position on the UK government's Rape Clause, or maybe formulating at least one policy other than opposing taking on parliamentary responsibility, one of those might be a good place to start.