There is considerable merit in the approach taken by the new Campaign for Scottish Home Rule.

Those behind the campaign are calling for an underlying methodology to provide a foundation for the deliberations of the Smith Commission on greater powers for Scotland.

The vision of home rule they argue for would see greater powers going hand in hand with moves to make the Scottish Parliament more accountable and democratic, particularly by tying tax-raising powers to legislative powers.

The campaign already has genuine cross-party support, with former MSPs from the Scottish Conservatives, Liberal Democrats and the SNP involved, as well as former first minister Henry McLeish, and a representative of the Green Party.

Its steering group also includes a former moderator of the Church of Scotland and representatives from business and academia. The man behind it, Ben Thomson, is the chairman of centre-right thinktank Reform Scotland, who proposed the concept of devo-plus during the referendum campaign.

He says any new settlement should meet three key principles.

The campaign's starting assumption is that all powers ought to be presumed best devolved to Scotland, with Westminster then challenged to make a case for any powers it wants to retain at UK level.

This is an interesting inversion of the balance of proof, and might avoid the sense of resentment caused by a perception that MPs at Westminster hand Scotland limited powers based largely on self-interest.

The second principle is that greater powers come with greater responsibility for funding them. Regardless of which powers are retained and which will be part of further devolution, it is they that should dictate the funding formula for Scotland. If granted new powers, the Scottish Government should also be required to take charge of raising the funds to pay for them.

The final call is for a better relationship between Scotland and Westminster to help bring change about. Strengthened mutual respect will be to the advantage of both parties, the campaign says.

It aims to prevent the next settlement from descending into a matter of simple horse-trading between the different political parties.

Such an outcome would be out of keeping with the high levels of democratic engagement in the independence referendum campaign and the public mood.

The big question is how these worthy and admirable ideas can work in the context of a fast changing political and electoral context.

High ideals matter, but there is also a requirement to deliver new powers promptly. The Smith Commission's timetable is tight and, given the pledges made to Scotland's voters, it is important that it is adhered to.

Nevertheless, the home rule campaigners have made a valuable appeal for intellectual cohesion to underpin the debate over greater powers. It is one the Smith Commission would do well to heed.