It is somewhat rich of Michael Fallon, the defence secretary, to warn of 'political games' from the SNP over the transfer of responsibility for Crown Estate land to the Scottish Parliament.

Much of the game playing appears to have come from the other direction.

Last month's peculiar non-row over funding for the Queen was surely an example of just such political games, with the agreed devolution of Crown Estate assets used to underpin claims that the SNP was set to deprive the monarchy of £2 million. That wasn't the case, as first minister Nicola Sturgeon laboured to establish.

Another pre-emptive strike now appears to have been fired by Mr Fallon. He insists there should be no game-playing in response to the Ministry of Defence's intention to reserve control over a number of Crown Estate assets which currently form part of military establishments or have military purposes.

This appears provocative at best. There are clear benefits to devolving control over the Crown Estates, but while the SNP government will clearly have reservations about locations such as Faslane, being opposed to the renewal of Trident, the central issue is moot. Even in the event of independence, defence matters would continue to involve cooperation across the UK. The Smith Commission reaffirmed the importance of this when discussing greater powers for Holyrood.

Meanwhile, as this paper has argued before, devolved powers over areas such as Health and Safety or the Crown Estate, for example, cannot be used to undermine agreed reserved powers.

There is a growing sense, through the talking up of non-stories such as the SNP threat to the Queen's income, and this latest warning over the Crown Estate, that Scotland and the SNP are being misrepresented for political ends. In the context of more crucial debates such as the government's English Votes for English Laws proposal, that is regrettable.

The public can judge whether the SNP are playing games, and will assuredly do so, if the party appears to be undermining reserved powers over defence.

A relatively restrained response from SNP MP Angus Robertson, the party's leader at Westminster, is welcome. He accuses Mr Fallon of being high-handed and warns of a longer term danger to the union from such rhetoric - while stopping short of objecting to Westminster reserving some powers over militarily useful Crown Estate locations.

Meanwhile the devolution of powers over the Crown Estates - to be debated by MPs on Monday - is desirable and such devolution should be delivered at the earliest opportunity.

Over the years, the Crown Estate Commissioners, who have responsibility for for vast tracts of land including much of Scotland's coast, the sea bed, and large rural estates, have too often taken decisions that serve the Crown Estate's business interests in isolation without much consideration of the needs of local communities.

At its worst, they have been little better than absentee landlords, generating sizeable profits which are returned to the treasury with little accountability or transparency and no significant local reinvestment. That should change.

Instead, control of Crown Estate Assets should be first devolved to Holyrood, as per the cross party Smith agreement, with power then delivered more locally to Scottish Councils or even local communities, to deliver opportunities for commercial development, jobs and community development.