Exclusive - Cameron's royal coat of arms lectern gaffe

Tuesday, 21 February 2012 06:16
105 Comments
Print PDF

By a Newsnet reporter

Prime Minister David Cameron has come under criticism for a presentational gaffe made during his recent visit to Scotland. 

The Scottish court of the Lord Lyon has confirmed that Mr Cameron gave his speech in Edinburgh behind a lectern bearing the version of the royal coat of arms of the United Kingdom for use in England and Wales.

Mr Cameron ought to have used the distinct Scottish version of the royal coat of arms of the United Kingdon, which bears the crown of the Scottish monarch.

When in Scotland, the UK government should correctly use the Scottish version of the royal coat of arms of the United Kingdom.  This version is surmounted by the crown of Scotland, and bears the motto of the Scottish monarch, "nemo me impune lacessit" translated as "no one attacks me with impunity."

Some will view the coat of arms gaffe as yet another illustration of the lack of attention Westminster officials pay to Scotland, the Court of the Lord Lyon has confirmed that Mr Cameron made his speech standing behind a lectern bearing the coat of arms of the English monarch and surmounted by the English crown.  The implication of the use of this coat of arms in Scotland is that Mr Cameron's authority derives from the English crown.

The Court of the Lord Lyon is the official body in Scotland which regulates the granting and use of coats of arms and insignia.  In an email to a Newsnet Scotland reader, Mr Bruce Gorie, secretary to the Lyon Office said:

"... the Scottish version of the Royal Arms should have been displayed but it may be that the lectern used was one that travels with him and his aides had omitted to take in to account that a different version of the Royal Arms is used in Scotland.  While it is unfortunate, as a 'one off' incident it is not a matter that would concern us unduly but we trust that it will not be repeated."

The Scottish version of the royal coat of arms of the United Kingdom is shown in the image to the right.  The presentational gaffe was the second in the same week from Mr Cameron's government.

Last week the UK Foreign Office snubbed Cardinal Keith O'Brien, the leader of the Catholic Church in Scotland and the highest ranking Catholic clergyman in the United Kingdom.

A visit headed by Baroness Sayeeda Warsi, minister without portfolio in the Coalition cabinet, to meet with Pope Benedict and Vatican officials, included the head of the Catholic Church in England as a part of the delegation.  However no invite was sent to Cardinal O'Brien.

There has been speculation that no one in the UK Foreign Office realised that the head of the English Catholic Church was outranked by his Scottish counterpart.

Comments  

 
# Roll_On_2011 2012-02-21 08:50
In my opinion Cameron demonstrated that he wasn’t talking to the Scottish people, but over their heads to England. Either that or he is an arrogant/ignorant git.
 
 
# cadgers 2012-02-21 09:04
Both Roll_on_2011. Arrogant,ignora nt git and only talks to tories cause no-one else is listening
 
 
# jafurn 2012-02-21 10:34
Quoting Roll_On_2011:
In my opinion Cameron demonstrated that he wasn’t talking to the Scottish people, but over their heads to England. Either that or he is an arrogant/ignorant git.



I thought his speech was more aimed at the media and judging from the way they picked up the baton that message was heard ,by them, loudly and clearly.
They are all now going on and on about how Scotland will get more powers ...maybe....later....but only if we concede defeat and vote no in the referendum.
 
 
# Exile 2012-02-21 11:47
Or both.
 
 
# igster999 2012-02-21 08:57
I can't remeber if it was on NNS but this was already noted by someone. It is however good to see this gaffe highlighted. I'm sure it wasn't an intentional snub but it does throw a light on the fact that neither Cameron nor a single one of his advisers or entourage had the wit to realise. Yet another example of the woeful ignorance of all things Scottish in the Westminster mindset. It may in itself be fairly trivial but exposes the fact (as if it needs reinforcing) that they neither know very much nor care very much.
 
 
# Roll_On_2011 2012-02-21 09:02
Quoting igster999:
I can't remeber if it was on NNS but this was already noted by someone. It is however good to see this gaffe highlighted. I'm sure it wasn't an intentional snub but it does throw a light on the fact that neither Cameron nor a single one of his advisers or entourage had the wit to realise. Yet another example of the woeful ignorance of all things Scottish in the Westminster mindset. It may in itself be fairly trivial but exposes the fact (as if it needs reinforcing) that they neither know very much nor care very much.


I couldn't agree more.
 
 
# Sleekit 2012-02-21 13:51
igster999

I've noticed that some of the arguments put forward by posters on this site (and others) are starting to be asked officially from the SG...

Now it may be coincidence, or maybe it could be that people are paying attention to what us nutty Cybernats are up to...

Answers on a postcard please!
 
 
# igster999 2012-02-21 14:27
Yeah Sleekit,

I've noticed that a couple of times now too. What we now need is Foulkes' latest 'holocaust denier' atrocity spread as far and wide as possible - even the MSM perchance. I've seen a couple of posters raise this on various threads throughout the newspapers but no coverage yet from the MSM themselves while they were gey quick to jump on AS for his remarks (nae bias eh?).

Let's make this horrific man pay for his hideous belittling of six million deaths, whether you agree with Wilkie's claims or not.
 
 
# Jiggsbro 2012-02-21 14:41
Quoting igster999:
no coverage yet from the MSM themselves while they were gey quick to jump on AS for his remarks (nae bias eh?).



No, no bias. Alex Salmond is the elected leader of a national government. Lord Foulkes is an unelected, no-mark, anti-democratic parasite. What Alex Salmond says is newsworthy. What Foulkes says is not, because he doesn't matter.
 
 
# A_Scottish_Voice 2012-02-21 18:41
Apologies Jiggsbro, I did misinterpret your past post.
 
 
# Angus 2012-02-21 09:05
Ach, who cares, this is them all over, what was it Walter Scott said, someting like, the English treat the union as a total take over and ignore their partners?
 
 
# clootie 2012-02-21 09:21
Angus

I agree - they think it was a take over. They are convinced that this little fuss will go away shortly and it will be back to business as usual.
 
 
# John Lyons 2012-02-21 10:47
A freind of mine tried to tell me last week that Scotland was CONQUERRED by England. He also said Alec Salmond couldn't organise a pi** up in a brewery. This claim was backed up by the factthe the Holyrood project over ran and was massively over budget. A clear indication that Unionists are ignorant of thier history and have short memories. I'm sure you all know that it was England that begged Scotland to help it out when Elizabeth the first died and tey asked James the Sixth to be thier new king,and of course it was Labour who ruled Holyrood during the building of the new parliament. This is what we're up against, ignorance and denial of the facts.
 
 
# Triangular Ears 2012-02-21 11:47
I know someone who suspects that the Holyrood project shambles was deliberate, and designed to tell Scots from the outset that we are incapable of running anything.
 
 
# Arbroath1320 2012-02-21 12:51
Well I guess that plan has well and truly failed then T.E. :D
 
 
# Exile 2012-02-21 11:50
Scotland WAS effectively annexed by England, whatever form it took de jure. Our job, as Scottish nationalists, is to end the annexation and restore our national sovereignty.
 
 
# twinpowr 2012-02-21 09:10
By accident or not, David Cameron & his bunch of cronies, show that they are not thinking of the UK as including Scotland, except when it comes to "Stealing" her resources for use on ENGLISH projects.
 
 
# K Mackay 2012-02-21 17:47
Totally agree, thinking more and more that they don't even recognize us as a separate country in a union. I think alot of these unionists genuinely think of Scotland and a resource rich part of England, they certainly treat us accordingly.
 
 
# cokynutjoe 2012-02-21 09:31
The Scottish version of the Royal Arms shown here are wrong. The second quarter shows England & France, this hasn't been used since the British crown gave up its claim to be kings of France.
 
 
# uilleam_beag 2012-02-21 10:05
That's correct. I think this version dates from James VI's accession to the English throne in 1603 (according to the admittedly far from infallible Wikipedia). In addition to the top right quarter switching to the modern arms of the Kingdom of England, the bottom quarter has changed to a simpler Irish harp (though that may be only due to a preference). This one also lacks the Scottish motto -- even though the article specifically states it should be there.
 
 
# cokynutjoe 2012-02-21 11:20
Wullie, the Georges also kept up this daft claim to France and showed fleur de lis on their quarterings, along with a kind of dabbity for Hanover. Could be Victoria was the last to use these. She couldn't inherit Hanover due to Salic Law, (nae wummin),the same law debarred the English kings preposterous claim to the French crown, which caused untold death and misery.
The claim to be kings of Ireland is another joke.
 
 
# Vincent McDee 2012-02-21 11:33
What you both say is correct.

The one showing in the article is the coat of Arms of Charles II, King of Scots, lacking the Nemo Me Impune Lacessit, the Latin motto of the Order of the Thistle and of three Scottish regiments, The Royal Regiment of Scotland, Scots Guards and Royal Scots Dragoon Guards.

It was also the motto of several former units, including the Royal Scots, Royal Scots Greys, Royal Highland Fusiliers and Black Watch, some of which went on to be amalgamated to form the Royal Regiment of Scotland in 2006.

The differences between the two coats of arms can be observed here: en.wikipedia.org/.../...
 
 
# nchanter 2012-02-21 12:11
Quoting Vincent McDee:
What you both say is correct.

The one showing in the article is the coat of Arms of Charles II, King of Scots, lacking the Nemo Me Impune Lacessit, the Latin motto of the Order of the Thistle and of three Scottish regiments, The Royal Regiment of Scotland, Scots Guards and Royal Scots Dragoon Guards.

It was also the motto of several former units, including the Royal Scots, Royal Scots Greys, Royal Highland Fusiliers and Black Watch, some of which went on to be amalgamated to form the Royal Regiment of Scotland in 2006.

The differences between the two coats of arms can be observed here: en.wikipedia.org/.../...

Sorry , the Scots Guards is not a Scottish regiment
 
 
# Hugo 2012-02-21 12:55
Quote:
Sorry , the Scots Guards is not a Scottish regiment


Is there a clear definition of what constitutes a Scottish regiment?
 
 
# nchanter 2012-02-21 19:37
Quoting Hugo:
Quote:
Sorry , the Scots Guards is not a Scottish regiment


Is there a clear definition of what constitutes a Scottish regiment?

A Scottish regiment is one which was raised in Scotland as in the A&SH Seaforths, Camerons, HLI, KOSBs etc. T Scots Guard was raised in England as a member of the Brigade of Guards (short version)
 
 
# J Wil 2012-02-21 09:37
All this pomp and circumstance is a farce and should have no place in a modern Scotland, but while it is there they should at least get it right.

Where would David Dimbleby or Hugh the Welshman be without all this guff at their disposal during state events?
 
 
# alicmurray 2012-02-21 09:38
I don't believe that this was done deliberately. It is just symptomatic of a civil service, like their political masters, who are no longer fit for purpose. The rot probably set in when the mandarins saw the politicians helping themselves to more and more of the tax payers money under the disguise of we are worth it.
 
 
# nachtmusak 2012-02-21 09:43
Travels with his own lectern does he?

Probably thinks there aren't any lecterns in backward Scotland.

Lovely London lecterns.Another union benefit.
 
 
# J Wil 2012-02-21 12:42
Sounds like the cue for a book:

Travels with my lectern - David Cameron
 
 
# igster999 2012-02-21 14:59
Quoting J Wil:
Sounds like the cue for a book:

Travels with my lectern - David Cameron

Or more likely:

My Travels with a Plank of Wood by A. Lectern.
 
 
# J Wil 2012-02-21 17:57
Or, My travails with a plank of wood called Michael, possibly.
 
 
# uilleam_beag 2012-02-21 15:30
Was there no a guy that did that with a washing machine a while back? Maybe it was a fridge.
 
 
# Robabody 2012-02-21 16:10
it was entitled "Round Ireland with a fridge" uilleam and it was by Tony Hawks - quite a funny read.
 
 
# uilleam_beag 2012-02-21 18:39
Mony thanks, Robabody (Burke or Hare?). I thought someone on here would be bound to know!
 
 
# Jester 2012-02-21 15:46
Quoting nachtmusak:
Travels with his own lectern does he?

Probably thinks there aren't any lecterns in backward Scotland.

Lovely London lecterns.Another union benefit.

As I'm sure the American President does when he is in town. Aren't we becoming a bit too petty on here?
 
 
# UpSpake 2012-02-21 09:52
Wasn't this the same lectern he - Cameron used in his tour of the provinces ?. It was seen everywhere. Scotland is a region you must remember with no special requirements for Respect.
When you care little for the 'country' you are in, you care even less for convention.
 
 
# J Wil 2012-02-21 20:21
Its more of a pulpit than a lectern when he comes to preach to his flock in Scotland.
 
 
# Jings 2012-02-21 10:04
Oh come on,
I think we're grasping now. We don't want to be seen as a nation of pedants.
The vast majority of us wouldn't know and wouldn't care about the difference in such a pompous detail. To hell with coats of arms and Latin mottos this is the 21st century.
 
 
# BeltaneFire 2012-02-21 10:19
While it makes sense not to appear a nation of pedants, it would also make sense for the PM of this so-called United Kingdom to familiarise himself with the diplomatic customs, practices etc of all parts of his remit. Cameron has demonstrated a continual failure in this respect.

I would have thought that on coming to office, his advisers in the Civil Service would at least educate and inform. The fact that this evidently isn't done is what is actually so irritating, and not the detail of this particular issue, which again, I agree is largely irrelevant in the modern world.
 
 
# Jings 2012-02-21 10:29
Quoting BeltaneFire:
While it makes sense not to appear a nation of pedants, it would also make sense for the PM of this so-called United Kingdom to familiarise himself with the diplomatic customs, practices etc of all parts of his remit. Cameron has demonstrated a continual failure in this respect.

I would have thought that on coming to office, his advisers in the Civil Service would at least educate and inform. The fact that this evidently isn't done is what is actually so irritating, and not the detail of this particular issue, which again, I agree is largely irrelevant in the modern world.


But if we start examining every minute detail like this it only encourages them to do likewise. We don't want to get hoisted by our own petard. It will just slow everything down to an even more tedious level.
 
 
# Vincent McDee 2012-02-21 11:36
I totally agree we should focus on substance, but there's nothing wrong in demanding the substance with the proper forms and manners.

It's named style.
 
 
# nchanter 2012-02-21 12:17
Quoting Vincent McDee:
I totally agree we should focus on substance, but there's nothing wrong in demanding the substance with the proper forms and manners.

It's named style.

It matters or it dosn't I think it does.
 
 
# Holebender 2012-02-21 12:51
It matters. It's to do with protocol and respect.

Imagine the stushie if DC had gone to the US and had shown a Stars & Stripes with the wrong number of stars, or if he'd gone to France and used the old royal flag with the fleurs de lis instead of the tricolour.

It just goes to illustrate Whitehall's ignorance of Scotland and the internal workings of the UK in general. It also shows how big a surprise they are in for when it comes to divvying up the assets and liabilities - they think they own the lot and don't realise how much is really ours.
 
 
# Jiggsbro 2012-02-21 10:23
Cameron obviously thought it was important to have the royal coat of arms on his lectern (for some reason). He didn't think it was important to have the right one. Yes, coats of arms shouldn't be important in the C21, but Cameron thinks they are. He just doesn't think Scotland's is.
 
 
# Holebender 2012-02-21 12:53
It wasn't the royal coat of arms, it was the government coat of arms. There are differences, although the government's versions are based on the royal ones.

I honestly believe it was pure ignorance on the part of Cameron and his advisers, that they weren't even aware Scotland was different, but that is very illuminating in itself.
 
 
# edinburgh quine 2012-02-21 10:25
Maybe call me dave has given up already and this is his way of conceeding defeat. Personally I'm with you Jings, what does it matter? Let's get on with the referendum, win it, and then when call me dave visits, we'll have him stand in front of a map of Scotland, coloured yellow
 
 
# nchanter 2012-02-21 12:22
Quoting edinburgh quine:
Maybe call me dave has given up already and this is his way of conceeding defeat. Personally I'm with you Jings, what does it matter? Let's get on with the referendum, win it, and then when call me dave visits, we'll have him stand in front of a map of Scotland, coloured yellow

If you think it no longer matters, where do you draw the line on Scottish history or does that not matter what of the Saltire the three honours, or is it only politics that would hold a country together.
 
 
# John Lyons 2012-02-21 10:50
Jings, I agree we don't want to be pedants, but would Cameron just swan in to somewhere like Lybia or Iraq or Afghanistan or China ignorant of local customs? Of course not. The diplomats would be out in force to ensure there were no gaffes. So either Scotand is not important enough and this is a symbol of The Unions contempt for us or it's plain old being rubbish at thier job. Either way, time to get rid.
 
 
# Holebender 2012-02-21 12:56
agreed.
 
 
# nchanter 2012-02-21 12:16
Quoting Jings:
Oh come on,
I think we're grasping now. We don't want to be seen as a nation of pedants.
The vast majority of us wouldn't know and wouldn't care about the difference in such a pompous detail. To hell with coats of arms and Latin mottos this is the 21st century.

When visiting foreign countries does not the Queen observe the required conventions as in the proper attire when entering mosques etc.
 
 
# snowthistle 2012-02-21 12:38
I'm with you Jings, I really couldn't care less
 
 
# nchanter 2012-02-21 19:39
Quoting snowthistle:
I'm with you Jings, I really couldn't care less

Why are you supporting independence or are you just stirring the pot?
 
 
# Ben Power 2012-02-21 10:21
How many of us actually share these articles on Facebook. Sending them far and wide by Facebook and email is a great way of encouraging support for both Independence and Newsnet Scotland.
 
 
# Jings 2012-02-21 10:23
Quoting Ben Power:
How many of us actually share these articles on Facebook. Sending them far and wide by Facebook and email is a great way of encouraging support for both Independence and Newsnet Scotland.

I share the vast majority of them much to the annoyance of all my English friends :)
I try to explain it's for their good as well as ours. It's a tough concept for them but it's slowly sinking in.
 
 
# Siôn Jones 2012-02-21 10:38
Now THIS is how you do it, dave:

richmedia.lse.ac.uk/.../...

Learn from the master.
 
 
# uilleam_beag 2012-02-21 11:13
Thanks, Siôn. I heard the recording of the speech before but it's good to get the Q&A session as well.
 
 
# Vincent McDee 2012-02-21 11:39
Hi Si. Is there other way to find out which doesn't involve a 35 minutes download?
 
 
# alexb 2012-02-21 10:39
One more example of the contempt Westminster has for Scotland, and it,s people. Every time a London-based politician comes North and spouts their unionist nonsense, it merely adds to the support for independence.
 
 
# Lupus Incomitatus 2012-02-21 11:02
It was deliberate.
 
 
# Electric Hermit 2012-02-21 11:35
You have to wonder if it is. As with the snub to Cardinal Keith O'Brien. The UK Prime Minister's office has a veritable army of aides and civil servants behind the scenes a large number of whom are paid specifically to deal with matters of protocol. Have they all been off sick?
 
 
# Lupus Incomitatus 2012-02-21 11:44
I some times wonder if Cameron is playing a double game and wants us to break the union so he can, he hopes, have a Tory hegemony in perpetuity?

What was it that Sherlock Holmes said about exhausting all the obvious reasons etc etc?
 
 
# Jiggsbro 2012-02-21 18:26
Quoting Lupus Incomitatus:
What was it that Sherlock Holmes said about exhausting all the obvious reasons etc etc?


I think it was "When you have eliminated the possible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be a Tory".
 
 
# Fungus 2012-02-21 11:14
To be honest who cares? The whole monarchy is a medieval anachronism with no place in a modern society. I'd rather the debate was how Westminster was neglecting Scotland because suicide rates were higher or unemployment rates or anything with relevance to the well being of our society.
Not that they had the wrong picture on a lectern.
 
 
# Electric Hermit 2012-02-21 11:51
Quoting Fungus:
To be honest who cares?



Probably no-one. If it was an isolated incident. But we should be concerned when there is a steady drip-drip of these corrosive little incidents which can have a cumulative effect of diminishing Scotland's institutions.

Why do you think the unionists for so long avoided acknowledging the Scottish Government, insisting on referring to it as an "Executive" instead?

Such petty slights are related to the colonialist "empty land" myths along with the disparaging of local cultures and the portrayal of native peoples as ignorant savages in need of salvation.

The old habits of British imperialism die very hard.
 
 
# cokynutjoe 2012-02-21 11:41
There are plenty of other threads for that Fungus. This one is about heraldry and the correct use of!
 
 
# Lupus Incomitatus 2012-02-21 11:45
No cokynutjoe, it is about respect or the lack of, from Cameron.
 
 
# cokynutjoe 2012-02-21 13:40
LI, looking at Wiki, these are the arms approved for use by British Government ministers. Cameron is not permitted to use the Scottish version, Alex Salmond on the other hand is.
The Scottish Office uses this English version, it's what appears on your passport.
Short of a ruling from the Lyon Office, the referendum will hopefully settle matters.
 
 
# Holebender 2012-02-21 16:41
You have got this completely wrong. Look at the Scotland Office website if you don't believe me!

The UK Government uses the Scottish version in Scotland. The Scottish Government uses the Saltire with "The Scottish Government" written in English and Gaelic.
 
 
# mato21 2012-02-21 11:51
I too agree in this day and age we do not need these things (like the HoL) but as we still have them, and they are important to some, it is incumbent on those responsible to get it right
 
 
# ituna semea 2012-02-21 11:54
The First Minister rattles on about respect, if he showed a bit more maybe it would be reciprocated. Instead he carries on De Gaulle like as if every criticism of him is also a criticism of La Belle Ecosse.
 
 
# RandomScot 2012-02-21 12:22
If you had any respect you wouldn't call yourself "son of the Union" in the language of a nation undergoing it's own movement towards self-determination
 
 
# snowthistle 2012-02-21 12:39
ituna
examples of such behaviour please : )
 
 
# Jester 2012-02-21 20:06
Quoting snowthistle:
ituna
examples of such behaviour please : )

Just read the Daily Mail...
 
 
# Mad Jock McMad 2012-02-21 11:59
Time to get a life before the discussion trends towards just how many Labour MSPs would it take to change a light bulb.... :-D
 
 
# Arbroath1320 2012-02-21 14:34
Do any Labour MSP's even know what a light bulb is MJM? :D
 
 
# Roll_On_2011 2012-02-21 20:27
Naw they would bang it on the expenses and get somebody to do it for them.
 
 
# Holebender 2012-02-21 12:06
No need to thank me for pointing this out!

The easiest way to tell the difference is to look at the central shield; the English version has the three lions of England in the top left and bottom right quarters, and the lion rampant of Scotland in the top right quarter. The Scottish version has the lion rampant in the top left and bottom right quarters, and the three lions in the top right quarter.

For good illustrations of the different coats of arms see en.wikipedia.org/.../... and en.wikipedia.org/.../...
 
 
# Exile 2012-02-21 12:10
Are they not actually three leopards? I remember reading that somewhere.
 
 
# Holebender 2012-02-21 12:34
They are lions but in heraldry they are described as leopards. I don't know why.
 
 
# J Wil 2012-02-21 12:46
No wonder there is confusion with governmentspeak !
 
 
# Exile 2012-02-21 12:57
Weird.
 
 
# Hing em high 2012-02-21 18:27
And Leopards as we well know - never change thier spots!
 
 
# Holebender 2012-02-21 15:08
According to englandfootballonline.com/.../... the heraldic word leopard used to describe a lion comes from France. Apparently in French heraldry the word lion is specifically used to mean a lion rampant. A lion in any other posture (e.g. couchant or passant as in the English crest) is described as a leopard!
 
 
# hiorta 2012-02-21 12:25
""While it is unfortunate, as a 'one off' incident it is not a matter that would concern us unduly but we trust that it will not be repeated."

What a condescending excuse. These folk just seem incapable of getting anything right. I'm sure the Germans would have done so much better.
However, with only the rump of the UK to administer the balance is probably quite
accurate
 
 
# exel 2012-02-21 12:40
EXCLUSIVE!!: FFS PARANOIA more like.
 
 
# Exile 2012-02-21 13:05
How do you come to that conclusion, exel? If no-one else is reporting it, does that not make it an exclusive? And why paranoia? Seems to me to be reasonable to object, or at the least point out Cameron and his team got it wrong/couldn't care less/sought to snub Scotland/etc. You can take your pick over the explanation, but OK it cannot be construed as being even by the wildest stretch of the imagination.
 
 
# exel 2012-02-21 13:43
Exile 2012-02-21 12:05
“How do you come to that conclusion, exel? If no-one else is reporting it, does that not make it an exclusive? And why paranoia? Seems to me to be reasonable to object, or at the least point out Cameron and his team got it wrong/couldn't care less/sought to snub Scotland/etc. You can take your pick over the explanation, but OK it cannot be construed as being even by the wildest stretch of the imagination.”

As was mentioned earlier the coat of arm displayed in the first picture was the Royal coat of Arms without helm. Her majesties coat of arms (2nd picture) the Scotland version can only be used by the queen.

The UK government are allowed to use the first.
 
 
# Holebender 2012-02-21 15:16
Untrue. The UK Government crest in Scotland is different and based on the Scottish Royal Arms. See, for example, the crest displayed on the website of the Scotland Office - a UK Government department concerned with the governance of Scotland. www.scotlandoffice.gov.uk
 
 
# exel 2012-02-21 15:55
Holebender 2012-02-21 14:16
"Untrue. The UK Government crest in Scotland is different and based on the Scottish Royal Arms. See, for example, the crest displayed on the website of the Scotland Office - a UK Government department concerned with the governance of Scotland. www.scotlandoffice.gov.uk"

They do not look any different. Neither looks anything like the picture in the article purporting to be the one Cameron should have used.
A stushie about nothing?
 
 
# Holebender 2012-02-21 16:49
They are very different, and it is only the poor quality of the picture on the Scotland Office website which obscures the difference.

The Scottish crest is topped with a Scottish crown. The English crest has an English crown. The Scottish crest has the unicorn on the left, and the unicorn wears a (Scottish) crown. The English crest has an uncrowned unicorn on the right. The English crest includes the motto of the Garter Knights (honi soit qui mal y pense), the Scottish one does not. The shield in the middle of the Scottish crest has the lion rampant in the top left and bottom right quarters, and the three lions passant guardant in the top right quarter. The English crest has the three lions in the top left and bottom right quarters, and the lion rampant in the top right quarter.

See en.wikipedia.org/.../... and en.wikipedia.org/.../... for good quality pictures.

I bet you were rubbish at spot the difference.
 
 
# cokynutjoe 2012-02-21 12:44
Was there not some controversy of drug taking in the Engerland football squad a while back and with it the suggestion of replacing the three lions with three lines?

The Scottish First Minister can use the Scottish version. Cameron can not and like the Scotland Office uses the English version, as do other government departments, including passports.
 
 
# uilleam_beag 2012-02-21 15:19
Actually, the Scottish Office uses an adapted version of the Scottish royal arms. It's also used by the Procurator Fiscal and the Court of Sessions, and formerly by the Scottish Executive until the Saltire logo was introduced with the name change to Scottish Government.
 
 
# Holebender 2012-02-21 15:20
Again, untrue. The UK Government in Scotland uses the Scottish version. See the website of the Scotland Office for an example. www.scotlandoffice.gov.uk

The Scottish Government, on the other hand uses a Saltire with the words "The Scottish Government" in English and Gaelic. (The previous (Labour) Scottish Executive used to use the Scottish version of the UK Government crest, btw.)
 
 
# cokynutjoe 2012-02-21 15:46
You're right enough guys, the Scotland Office does use the Scottish version, just checked Wiki.
The saltire thing is just a logo, the First Minister can use the Scottish arms if he wishes. Can Cameron though?
 
 
# Holebender 2012-02-21 16:55
It is the crest of the UK Government, not the Scottish Government. Therefore Cameron can and should use it in Scotland, but Salmond cannot.

I believe the old Scottish "Executive" used it to show its subordination to the UK.
 
 
# karaokeguitarman 2012-02-21 14:00
If the choice of Holyrood was as has been suggested a deliberate ploy to demonstrate that we could not even organise a parliament,then it has indeed failed abysmally in that sense. What it has also done, but much more effectively ,is show that Labour are incapable of opposition never mind government be it Holyrood or Wastemonster.Mind you Iain Gray Johann Lamont Gordon Brown and Alastair Darling do that anyway.
Scotland will leave the United Kingdom. She has no choice now.
Labour know they cannot form another government,they need a miracle in the South of England,and all they have got is Moribund!
Make that two miracles.
 
 
# alexb 2012-02-21 14:05
Now I see Thatcher,s last Secretary of State for Scotland, Michael Forsyth, has come out and criticised Cameron,s latest intervention in the independence debate as "playing into Alex Salmond,s hands". This comment, along with the apparent support from Rupert Murdoch, although I,m not sure about his motives, shows we are moving in the right direction, while all the while the opposition is fragmenting.
 
 
# Arbroath1320 2012-02-21 23:13
All the while A.S. continues doing what he does best, showing Scotland off to the world and being recognised as a world class politician.

Can anyWastemonster politician make the same claim?

Is there any Wastemonster politician even close to meeting the standard set by A.S.?
 
 
# J Wil 2012-02-21 18:04
The fear factor should get greater publicity. Viz., What Westminster will do to Scotland if we don't vote YES for independence.
 
 
# D_A_N 2012-02-21 18:54
I think it'll come closer to the time
 
 
# Old Smokey 2012-02-21 18:11
Ok I'm going to put my penny's worth in on this.
My thinking is the Scottish Coat of Arms is or should be used by all ministers of the Crown in Scotland, as well as the judiciary.
The coat of arms with the motto 'in defens' is a crown coat of arms.
This is the post union of crowns version of the Royal coat of arms of the Kingdom of Scotland.
The one featured above is slightly incorrect as its missing the 'nemo me impune lacessit' under motto which marks it out as the Royal coat of arms of the United Kingdom for use in Scotland.

Its debatable as to whether the UK Prime Minister should display the Scottish coat of arms when in Scotland. It could be argued that the minute he crosses the border into Scotland he is recognised as a minister of the Scottish crown, it would be basic good manners to actually defer to that. But, the problem is,in the last 300 years, there has been a dendancy to just use the Royal coat of arms of the United Kingdom . Various Prime Ministers from 1707 havent bothered in the slightest of showing any resemblence of good manners towards Scotland and the badges of office in Scotland. One that comes to mind was Disraeli, who simply hated the notion of visiting Scotland to meet Queen Victoria to discuss matters of state.
So 300 years of abject indiffernce towards Scotland will not be changed overnight
 
 
# uilleam_beag 2012-02-21 18:29
I think you've just about nailed it, Smokey.
 
 
# livilion 2012-02-23 19:36
Well spotted Old Smokey but what about the French fleur-de-lys in the English quarter of the crest in the illustration at the head of the article?
 
 
# A_Scottish_Voice 2012-02-21 18:27
A classic Freudian slip.
 
 
# Talorcan 2012-02-21 21:27
This wouldn't bother me much at all as it's more than likely a genuine mistake...I think.
But it's strange in that if we bring this sort of thing to anyone's attention it gets called paranoia etc. The same argument that we were just being pedantic was used when we dared to complain that the title EIIR is factually incorrect. 'Oh, you're just making a fuss over nothing.''
That's how it was put to me. My answer was that if it was a thing of no consequence then it could just as easily be changed to EIR. I was then told that I was just being silly.
Funny how it's always us that's in the wrong isn't it? This battle for Scotland isn't going to end with independence; it's going to go on for a very long time.
 

You must be logged-in in order to post a comment.

Donate to Newsnet Scotland

Banner

Latest Comments