Failure to grasp the nettle brings its own wave of complications

The centuries of ties between the Scots and the English are littered with broken promises. Each has left its layer of resentment, each remembered as a festering sore that has carried forward for generations.

In 1979, the Scots failed to back a Scottish Assembly by a sufficiently high margin to bring it about. They were promised a better offer by the Conservatives, and were aggrieved ever after that one never appeared during the era of Margaret Thatcher.

Now, there is the offer published as "The Vow" earlier this week on the front-page of the Glasgow-based Daily Record, signed by David Cameron, Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg, guaranteeing "permanent and extensive new powers" for the Holyrood parliament.

Like most promises made in haste, life has become more difficult in the cold light of an Edinburgh dawn following the decision of Scots to reject the independence offered by 55.3 to 44.7 per cent – a far higher margin than few had believed likely in the final days.

The offer, driven by a re-energised Gordon Brown, would be worked on immediately, become a draft Bill by November and reach the floor of the House of Commons in January and get a second reading by March, it was envisaged.

Impossible timetable

That timetable is now all but impossible, as Alex Salmond was quick to point out in his resignation speech as Scotland's first minister and SNP leader yesterday, a decision that will come into effect next month.

Cameron has widened the scope of the changes needed which will, if completed successfully, bring about the greatest constitutional change the United Kingdom has seen perhaps for centuries.

Standing on the steps of No 10 Downing Street, Cameron said "a balanced settlement" is needed, one that would be "fair to people in Scotland and importantly to everyone in England, Wales and Northern Ireland as well".

However, the promises made to Scottish voters will be honoured, all sides insisted last night, with even those Conservative MPs who are opposed to the idea of giving the Scots more accepting that otherwise London’s word will be worth nothing north of the border.

But the difficulties are legion: the commitment to keep the so-called Barnett Formula, the funding rule that governs the share-out of cash from the treasury to the regions, means, perhaps, less than it might appear.

The formula – which has long benefited Scotland over Wales, for example – will change as Scotland gets more control over taxes, though that realisation will inevitably become a source of contention when it is more generally understood in Scotland.

The West Lothian question

However, Cameron went even further than Gordon Brown did by promising to solve the vexed West Lothian question first posed by Enoch Powell: why should Scottish MPs vote on English laws if English MPs cannot vote on Scottish ones?

A solution to this has to be found. The number of Scottish MPs could be reduced further below the 59 now sitting in Westminister since the creation of the Holyrood parliament in 1999, or Scottish MPs could excuse themselves from deliberating on English, or English/Welsh-only laws.

However, the complications are endless: how would, for example, a Labour government dependent on Scottish MPs for its majority be able to get its legislation through the Commons if it was outnumbered in south of the border constituencies?

The solution is federalism, or something close to it, but there is no appetite for that in Westminster, since it would mean an English parliament, the metamorphosis of the unelected House of Lords into an elected US-style Senate, along with other changes.

Politically, however, Cameron has produced a masterstroke at the end of a week that looked for a while like it could see him having to resign for being the prime minister who presided over the destruction of the United Kingdom.

Conservative MPs, who had been preparing to rebel, will be swayed by his plans to tend to England’s needs, while Labour will be on the back foot trying to defend itself after the consequences of a West Lothian change.

A pause for reflection

Faced with such complications, a pause for reflection is not sensible, but necessary, but it offers the boon to the Scottish National Party that it can feed off Scottish resentment towards delays, or the perception of delays, as the 2015 general election looms.

Such resentment could have consequences for the division of Scotland’s Commons seats among the parties. In the past 15 years, Scots have become adept at voting for the SNP in Scotland, but for Labour in Westminster elections. Will that continue?

Meanwhile, Scottish politics will now no longer just be about politicians, since the Yes campaign has created a grassroots movement that stretches into every townland in Scotland.

Today, many of those people are depressed, believing that their fellow countrymen and women have failed to grasp a torch that would light up the lives of generations to come.

What happens to them now? Do they recoil from politics in despair, or do they morph into people that can change the dynamic of existing parties, or create new ones in the months and years to come?

The optimistic have confidence in the latter. However, the next political questions that Scots will face will be ones of choosing between hard-to-distinguish politicians, rather than anything remotely similar to the question they answered on Thursday.