WHEN one finds oneself sailing towards choppy seas, it makes sense to drop anchor and take stock of where one is headed.

It would not be wise in such circumstances to then sail full steam ahead, regardless.

We have argued before that in the unchartered waters of English Votes for English Laws, significant dangers loomed over the horizon; it was welcome news, therefore, when the Leader of the House of Commons, Chris Grayling, yesterday announced that the Government's hastily concocted plans would be redrafted, with a vote delayed until September. This manoeuvre has undoubtedly come about for pragmatic rather than principled reasons - nothing loosens a politician's firmly-held conviction faster than the fear of defeat.

As we reported last week, that fear was a very real one. A small but potentially significant number of Conservative backbenchers were ready to rebel; combined with the votes of Labour, SNP, DUP and Liberal Democrats, they would have holed this flagship policy before the waterline.

The reasons behind the Tory MPs' unease involve both realpolitik and real concern for the future of the Union. Some fear that the introduction of second-class politicians - which would be the fate of Scottish members - would see a drift towards independence not in only in Scotland, but also in Wales and Northern Ireland. Others fear that English-only votes, where the Government would have a greater majority, would significantly reduce their power and influence.

The maelstrom whipped up by a determined Opposition also played a significant part in yesterday's announcement. Here, the embattled former Scottish Secretary, Alistair Carmichael, deserves a mention in despatches. He may have raised eyebrows when claimed that David Cameron was "now a bigger threat to the Union than Alex Salmond" but his description of the Evel proposals as an "outrage" resounded loudly. We share his relief that ministers "have listened to the concerns of their own backbenchers" if not others.

The profound changes to the constitutional make-up of the United Kingdom that were envisaged in the fast-track proposals to restrict the voting rights of Scottish MPs detailed last week had the potential to do great damage to the stability of the Union, involving as they did the arbitrary creation of an English Parliament.

While we accept that the West Lothian Question still needs to be addressed, the principle of Evel is fundamentally flawed. The fact remains that almost no English-only legislation does not have a budgetary impact on Scotland through Barnett consequentials; besides, newly-released figures show that since 2001, excluding Scottish MPs would have changed the outcome of just 0.7 per cent of Westminster votes.

There is also the major concern that the constitutional balance of the UK could be dramatically altered through the procedural mechanism of altering the Standing Orders of the House of Commons. It does not look as if the Government is to change tack here; this is nothing short of reckless.

We are of the opinion that the Government's course needs to be radically altered; but given that Evel II will be launched as early as Monday - there will be two days of debate next week - that might be a forlorn hope. The champagne will be iced only when we see the detail.