The Queen was so furious over claims she was delighted when Scotland voted against independence that she said PM David Cameron should get “six of the best”.
An angry Monarch said the-then Tory leader, caught on microphone claiming she had “purred” down the phone after the 2014 result, should get the traditional punishment of six strokes with a cane for making up nonsense. The revelation, from former first minister Alex Salmond, comes just days after the 96-year-old died at Balmoral Castle.
A member of the privy council who yesterday confirmed her heir Charles as King, said she angrily denied the story at a meeting with him days later.
He said: “The week after the Scottish referendum, Cameron was caught boasting to Mayor Michael Bloomberg in New York that the Queen had ‘purred’ down the phone at him after the result. The next day I was asked to a breakfast meeting at Balmoral where a furious Queen told me that Cameron’s account was nonsense, that she wasn’t in the habit of purring and that what he required was ‘six of the best’ – her exact words.
“On a choice of believing the Queen or the Prime Minister, I chose the Queen.”
Cameron had been forced to issue a grovelling apology after breaking protocol by recounting his version of a conversation with the late monarch. He was picked up by a Sky News microphone telling Bloomberg the Queen had “purred down the line”.
The PM would later tell the Andrew Marr Show that he felt “extremely sorry and very embarrassed”, adding: “I have made my apologies and I think I will probably be making some more.”
But until now, his suggestion that the Queen expressed happiness at the no vote has not been refuted. The Monarch was famously reported to have told well-wishers outside Crathie Kirk, near Balmoral, to “think very carefully” before going to the polls.
Salmond, who bonded with the Queen over a shared love of horse racing, said: “It is a cardinal belief of some Unionists, including it seems Liz Truss, that the late Queen was an ardent campaigner for the Union.
“I just don’t see it that way. I think the Union she was really interested in was the union of the crowns not the parliaments and, in contrast to some Tories, she actually knew the history and the difference. The Queen was also very adaptable and wise – she moved with the times and had grown to rather liking the Scottish Parliament.
“However, seeing the Queen, as Cameron now freely admits he tried to do, as a weapon to be used politically was not only shabby but shortsighted. Who do the Tories think will fight their battles for them now?”
With pressure mounting on the UK Government to grant the Scottish Parliament the right to hold a second referendum, there will be a huge interest in whether King Charles will strengthen or weaken the Union and support for a referendum. The Queen was known to have a huge love of Scotland and spent every summer at Balmoral where she passed away on Thursday.
She regularly attended the opening of the Scottish Parliament and had a deep understanding of Scottish history.
Leading Scottish historian Sir Tom Devine was knighted by the Queen in the 2014 Birthday Honours for “services to the study of Scottish history”. He believes the Queen would not have been supportive of the Union becoming “one of coercion”.
He said: “When I was knighted, she touched my shoulder with the sword of her father, King George VI. Then when I stood up, she said it was a particular pleasure to give the honour to a scholar for the study of, and then she paused and then with great emphasis said, ‘Scottish history’.
“Every time she addressed the Scottish Parliament, her deep sense of affection for Scotland was clear. One of the things which does have a degree of political resonance is that, unlike recent Conservative governments who seem to increasingly regard Scotland as a regional appendage, the Queen understood she was dealing with a nation which came together in 1707 in legal partnership with England, and that it is one of the most ancient and respected nations in Europe going right back to medieval times.
“The refusal of the government to consider a democratic referendum – not to concede independence but just the democratic right to have a vote – is creating a great danger the Union moving from one of consent to one of coercion. That was never, as I understand it, in the mentality of Elizabeth II.”
Devine said he believed it would be difficult for Charles to achieve the same levels of public support as his mother in Scotland. He added: “My speculation would be that there will be two phases to the UK’s response to the death of the Queen.
“For a period of time there will be tremendous good wishes and also sympathy for the Royal Family in general and Charles in particular, having lost his mother, because of the affection the British people had for her. After that, I think there will be little chance of him attracting that same level of affection which is very rare.”
Devine, professor emeritus of history at Edinburgh University, added: “I expect he will stop making his personal views on subjects from architecture to the environment known. Polling in 2021 suggested an approval rating for the Queen of 84per cent, while in Scotland Charles has been as low as 41per cent.
“How big an impact that could have on support for independence really depends how significant the monarchy is in terms of solidifying the union. I think the chances of any independence vote in the lifetime of this government is non-existent because there is a real chance that it would be lost.
“When legislation was enacted to allow the 2014 referendum it was because the No side was expected to win by a huge majority and put the issue to bed for at least a generation. That didn’t happen.”
To sign up to the Daily Record Politics newsletter, click here.
