Today's debate on the consequences of the Scottish independence referendum will be a chance for Westminster to consider its response to what was certainly the political event of the year, and quite possibly this entire parliament.

People in Scotland will expect a clear commitment to honouring the promises of greater powers made before the ballot.

Yesterday saw the publication of a command paper on devolution of further powers to Scotland. It sets out the proposals the three main parties outlined in the spring.

Critics say the debate has already left these policies behind. However, its purpose is as a statement of intent ahead of the Smith Commission's deliberations, which will in turn lead to legislative proposals. None of this should be trapped in the distraction of the English Votes for English Laws (Evel) issue. However there is a danger the parliamentary debate will be dominated by this. It will be a discouraging sign if it does.

More discouraging still are the proposals from TV network chiefs for pre-election leaders' debates. The suggestion is that David Cameron and Ed Miliband should debate as the two putative prime ministers, with Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg joining the Tory and Labour leaders for another programme. Ukip leader Nigel Farage -only - is to be invited for a third. This plan has an almost studied naivety about it. It is both illogical and unacceptable that Mr Farage should be given the opportunity to appear in pre-election TV debates and not someone from the SNP, the Green Party, or Plaid Cymru. If the reason for inviting Ukip is that they recently won their first seat, then why not any of these other parties that have consistently had MPs?

If Ukip are invited because of their size, then why should they and the LibDem leader feature ahead of the SNP, which now has the third-largest paid-up support in the UK?

The broadcasters behind these proposals have already faced criticism for "boosting" Ukip, making their success a self-fulfilling prophecy.

It has not escaped notice, for example, that long before it had an MP, Ukip featured more on the BBC's Question Time than other minority parties. It hardly helps TV broadcasters' defence to offer the party such a platform without balancing it.

Such proposals can never please everyone, as demonstrated by the response from Ukip, which views participation in only one debate as inadequate. To be fair, the party's Scottish chairman also said the SNP and Greens should be involved.

They should indeed. Evidence for the impact of the Scottish vote is amply provided by the command paper and today's debate.

Coverage of the parties and policies on offer at next year's General Election cannot be governed by likely ratings or perceptions of the political landscape from the viewpoint of south-east England. To do so would be quite contrary to the lessons of the extraordinary engagement in democracy represented by September's referendum. The broadcasters must think again.