Margo MacDonald: Scots will shape our own destiny

Readers are advised to proceed only if they are seated and within reach of smelling salts.

What they are about to read could shock them to the core, knock them off balance, thus risking pain and distress. But Her Majesty's subjects should know that the head of state spoke to the head of government following a huge political change in the election to one of the institutions of governance in her United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Shocking.

Of course the Queen would discuss with her Prime Minister the reasons, perhaps, and the results, certainly, of the Scottish elections. She may even have asked David Cameron why the Welsh results were so different and if the current resurgence of the militant residue of the IRA had any noticeable effect on the Stormont election. She is the head of state and she'd be falling down on the job if she didn't keep well informed.

But while we should be reassured that obtaining such information does not cross the line into that part of our system of governance that, operationally, should reflect the wishes of we, the people, we should not be soft-soaped into believing the monarchy will be a neutral, non-player in the constitutional debate made inevitable by the SNP's election victory.

As she said at the time of her silver jubilee before the 1979 referendum, she is acutely aware of having been crowned queen of the United Kingdom. A study of that speech indicates that for this monarch, the UK is the sum total of its institutions, rather than a spiritual and cultural bond amongst people.

This stands in contrast to Prince Charles' attitude to the Australian debate on whether the monarchy or an elected president would be more in keeping with modern Australia. The man who would be king said it was the Australians' choice, and that it would be respected.

Although the leaked report of the alleged conversation between Her Majesty and David Cameron is credited to the spinners in Buckingham Palace, in all likelihood the government's publicity department provided encouragement. The only surprise was the crown card being played so early in the game. Her Majesty, as opposed to the monarchy, is seen as a trump card in the unionists' hand. She, William and Kate project the stability, continuity of her UK.

But if the Scots want, and the appropriate members of royal succession agree, there should be no obstacle to the monarch's continuing to be the head of state in Scotland and England, and Wales and Northern Ireland.

It's a mystery why Westminster governments have been able to play the monarchy as their joker when the Queen has already established the principle of fulfilling the role of head of state for several commonwealth countries.

Perhaps the confusion results from the disinterest, at best, and lack of understanding of our constitution, at worst, on the part of possibly a majority of our fellow citizens. Fascination with the study of constitutional history or its practical application is limited.

For most of us, most of the time, it doesn't matter a docken leaf that we don't know why the Welsh Assembly, for example, should have been invested with less independence of action than was devolved to Holyrood.

Of more relevance is the choice Scots will have to make in the coming referendum. Arguably, without absolutely essential background knowledge of how sovereignty differs from devolution, many Scots will not understand the different possibilities for what each might be able to produce in terms of economic performance and quality of life.

Also, a public information campaign is needed to explain the different forms of co-operation that already exist among sovereign states all over the world. The notion of sovereign states in the social union of the UK is an obvious development for our islands.

The referendum will be fought on principles, not on negotiated propositions, so all the more reason to explore how Britons would customise national sovereignty with social union to suit our differing needs and agendas.

It's pretty obvious we need to march to a different drum from Westminster on building the economy that best suits us.

Less obvious perhaps because of disinterest in political structures, is the linkage between economic and foreign policies.

Yet if Scots are to decide which relationship with the EU and EFTA serves our situation best, we must establish a sovereignty that is recognised internationally. There's lingering attachment to the old-fashioned notion that being British carries advantage when dealing with other countries.

But that view has been overtaken by the changes in the balance of global power, and studies are beginning to show small countries as having better coping mechanisms.

Although the SNP has shown ability in government, it has neglected the development of the constitutional case for independence.