And so do I...
I will just talk instead on what would be the impact of Scotland's impending independence to the royal family.
There are properties of the royal family in Scotland and most of the titles of its senior members are tied with the Scottish territories and history. The Queen's husband, Prince Philip,carries the title of the Duke of Edinburgh, a noble house that honors the capital of Scotland. The Queen's heir-apparent, Prince Charles, the Prince of Wales, has a secondary title of Duke of Rothesay, which had been used by the heir-apparent to the Scottish throne before the personal union of Scotland and England. The Queen's second son, Prince Andrew, the Duke of York, has a second title of Earl of Inverness, a Scottish Earldom and so Prince William, the Duke of Cambridge, who has a secondary title of Earl of Strathearn, another Scottish Earldom.
The fate of these titles might also depend on the extent of Scotland's draft of their constitution should the majority will vote for yes. It might be allowed to retain as their courtesy title, but will never use officially when they will visit Scotland. Prince Charles when in Scotland is always address as Duke of Rothesay, this will not be the case from then on if Scotland will officially separate from the United Kingdom,
The royal family has private properties in Scotland most prominently Balmoral Castle, the Queen's summer retreat. It is not part of the crown property as it is traditionally private and usually inherited by the monarch's eldest son. If Scotland will declare independence this will not be turned over to the government but this will be subjected to the government policies on real estate properties.
Scotland's move to become independent might set a precedent to Wales and Northern Ireland and the palace courtiers wanted to avoid this at all cost. Though the Queen is said to be just civil with the issues and does not want to influence the poll, her courtiers are singing a different tune and the palace machines seemed on the front line.
Just weeks before the poll is held, the palace announced that the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge are expecting their second child. The timing of the announcement was notorious and it was being viewed by some analysts as a contingency plan to catch up with those who want to stay under the turf of the British Kingdom.
Royal babies provide delight to the subjects and whatever news related to royal infants bring inspiration. I might be accused as insensitive or hostile, but I am referring to history. Royals never actually announce pregnancies unless being provoked by the media or if the "baby bump" is already evident, thus, the surprise announcement of the Kate's pregnancy is a sort of a rubbish. She could be pregnant but can the palace wait for her abdomen to show some bumps before they hastily made an announcement?
I remember when she was pregnant with Prince George, they tried avoiding the pregnancy issue and waited months before the palace confirmed the speculations. And now, before the media could print a single speculation on the changes of her body, a surprise announcement came up.
Oh, just an opinion....