'The Royal Family are parasites, they cost us too much'

Even so, locals said they were surprised to hear that their part of Scotland was the most republican, or at least anti-monarchy, of any in the country.

One enduring, if unsubstantiated theory for the low popularity of the Royals in the district is the fact that the Falkirk and Stirling areas were key in the struggles between Scots and English of the 13th and 14th centuries.

The sites of the battles of Bannockburn, Stirling Bridge, and Falkirk are only a few miles away. In nearby Stirling, the skyline is dominated by the Wallace monument.

On a dull, wet Boxing Day in the Denny, the sky was dominated by clouds which were soon to pour, denying Scots a white festive season for another year in favour of a mild, wet one.

The streets were all but deserted, with little sign of life outside the pubs.

Local punters had more time for the Motherwell-Rangers game live on television than for the ups and downs of the Royal Family. The town might remind some of an ill-fitting Christmas jumper.

Industrial decline and the slump in local mining meant it contracted and lost population and wealth.

However, more recently it has expanded again with an increasing number of new private housing schemes occupied by commuters working in both Glasgow and Edinburgh.

The result is a place which is rather incongruous, with only a small town centre surrounded by large numbers of houses. Many shoppers seem to prefer Falkirk, Livingston, Stirling, Glasgow or Edinburgh.

Even the Unidentified Flying Objects legend has it bypass Denny in favour of nearby Bonnybridge.

For some, the little green men who visit Bonnybridge may be more relevant than the Royals.

Many locals were scathing in their criticism of royal "hangers-on" - ‘cling-ons’ maybe - who, it was felt, were draining away taxpayers’ money.

Eric Gillespie, a local taxi driver, said: "They’re definitely not worth the money. They do nothing for us round here.

"Even if they are to be kept, I would want to see some reforms. Cut the whole thing down to size - we don’t need so many hangers-on."

The sole member of the Royal Family who earned warm words from those interviewed by Scotland on Sunday was Princess Anne.

John Binnie, a roofer, said: "The only member of the Royal Family I have any time for at all is Princess Anne, because she is involved with the Strathcarron Hospice.

"It’s good to see her here now and again. But as for the rest of them, I have no time for them at all."

He admitted the area’s history and the popular image of Mel Gibson’s William Wallace had influenced his view.

He said: "What made it worse for me was the whole Braveheart thing. You then reflect on the fact that most of the monarchy are never up here."

Patrick McNally, a teacher, said: "If the alternative is a republic, then why not give that a go.

"At least then you get a chance to see whether the person in office is any good or not, and if they are not up to it they can be voted out."

He added: "I don’t accept the ‘good for tourism’ argument. It might be good for tourism in London, but it doesn’t do us much good.

"Anyway, there are plenty of other countries who do well from tourism without having kings or queens."

Builder Henry McRory said: "I have only one word for them all: ‘parasites’. They are costing us far too much money."

Factory worker Joe Crorken was equally scathing. He said: "What actual good do they do anyone? They’re not doing much for Scotland. Prince Philip is more likely to do us harm than good with all his gaffes."

However, some locals refused to follow the anti-monarchy line, claiming that the Royal Family brought stability to the country.

Heather Johnston, a civil servant, said: "I was brought up to respect the monarchy, and I am convinced they are a good thing. I think the country would be damaged and would be in danger of falling apart without them - they give the country stability.

"I don’t agree with those people who blame the monarchy for everything that is going wrong in the country.

"It’s the government that is responsible for spending our money and for dealing with public services. If people are not satisfied with how things are going then they should take it up with the government, not the Royal Family."

She added: "I think that the Royal Family make our country more interesting and romantic. I think it would make the country very boring to not have them."

Robert Livingstone, retired, claimed the lack of support for the royals was merely a temporary "blip" and that there was little real enthusiasm for a Scottish or British republic.

He said: "I think if it ever came down to a straight choice, people would opt for the monarchy. I support the monarchy myself, I think it’s a good thing. I don’t accept that this area is against the Royal Family."

"No one would seriously want to abolish the monarchy. Maybe their popularity goes up and down, but I don’t believe that anyone would really want to have a republic. I don’t think it would solve anything."

However, lorry driver Sid McIntosh - despite being pro-monarchy - was not surprised to hear that most people in his area disagreed with him.

He said: "It’s not a great surprise to me, really. Maybe it’s because of the history of the area that people are sceptical."

McIntosh sympathised with the dilemmas facing the Queen and the Royal Family.

He added: "They are just a family like all the rest of us. They have children who have complicated relationships, just like everyone else. Maybe people should lay off them, they haven’t done the country any harm."

He closed with a warning to opponents of the monarchy, saying: "It’s all very well to criticise, but I think the alternative would be no better. It might give us a lot more trouble."

[email protected]