WE have been told many times about the wonderful, energising effect of the independence referendum, which was no doubt the case for those in the happy-clappy Yes bubble.

For the majority of us outside, the experience was very different, with our politics, our patriotism, our courage, our intelligence and our age-related faculties having been insulted by the Yes campaign.

The result is a divided Scotland, which opinion polls show to marked by high levels of bad feeling between families, friends and neighbours. It is hard to see why the healing of these divisions is not the number one commitment of the Scottish Government. For example, the new First Minister has told the Scottish Parliament that she would govern for the whole of Scotland.

The Scottish Government has missed several opportunities to reunite Scotland after the damage of the referendum campaign. Before September 18, Alex Salmond undertook to convene an all-party Team Scotland to manage the ongoing process following the Yes vote he wrongly predicted. Some of us believed then that he should have offered to set up such a team regardless of the outcome, and invited others into a government of national unity and conciliation to govern until the 2016 Holyrood elections.

The publication of the report of the Smith Commission offers another such opportunity ("Sturgeon attacks Smith deal on new powers for Holyrood", The Herald, November 28). It is not perfect: in particular, many in the No camp believe that it risks going too far, as the referendum result only meant one thing: No to Scotland being an independent country.

However, it meets and exceeds the aims set in the Vow made by the Prime Minster, his Deputy and the Leader of the Opposition, by which the Yes campaign has set such great store since the result.

Moreover, it is a cross-party document, whose signatories include both the SNP and the Scottish Green Party. And essentially, it is also necessarily a compromise, which many of us regard as a good thing in itself.

Scotland faces a stark choice. We can either continue deeper into a dark place of division and increasing polarisation. Or we can accept that although our differences continue, we need to live together, respecting those differences and accommodating them through a new constitutional settlement within the UK. The Smith Commission proposals offer the chance to do just that.

It looks like they may be the last opportunity that we may have for reconciliation. Let us hope that even at this late stage, our politicians of all parties - but especially the SNP - give Smith the unqualified support it requires and deserves.

Peter A Russell,

87 Munro Road,

Jordanhill,

Glasgow.

FOR a long time psychologists have recognised a dichotomy in the process of learning. They identify the adult intellect on the one hand and the child/adolescent intellect on the other. The former is characterised by memory, abstract reasoning and a continuing accumulation of knowledge. The latter gives a greater emphasis to emotion and passion, which tend to displace the features of the former over time. The adult intellect is well exemplified by the aphorism of the famous economist John Maynard Keynes: "When the facts change, I change my mind." The adolescent intellect is summed up by the description of the French Bourbon dynasty: "They learn nothing and forget nothing."

In politics the adult intellect encapsulates the principles of the Scottish Enlightenment: freedom of speech and thought; the rights of private property and the associated freedom of market exchange; individual liberty and a moral responsibility to others - family, friends and strangers in that order. These ideas explain the longevity, adaptability and success of liberal conservatism.

Socialism and nationalism and their various mutations, while paying lip service to some of the above precepts, are essentially driven by emotion and passion, and all too often, as history has shown, succumb to the authoritarianism of the ends justifying the means. Inconsistency and contradiction are the hallmarks of these creeds.

Thus, in the reception given to the Smith Commission's report, the SNP and the First Minister sign up to the findings and conclusions, and then almost immediately qualify and backslide.

Consistently displaying its adolescent intellect, the SNP wants its cake and to eat it. But that is just not on, because the facts have changed.

As a result of a quarrelsome meeting of OPEC, the price of Brent Crude collapsed to less than $73 a barrel ("Oil prices fall as OPEC sticks with 30m barrels per day', The Herald, November 28).

At that price, there are virtually no tax revenues from North Sea Oil for the foreseeable future to pay for the socialistic dreams and bribes peddled by the SNP and Labour. These will require an enormous hike in income tax, which, thanks to Smith, is on its way. Undoubtedly, independence and devo-max would have been a fiscal disaster for Scotland. The SNP can just about see that, but cannot resist a childish foot-stamping strop. It is time for Scotland to return to adult politics: Unionism.

Richard Mowbray,

14 Ancaster Drive,

Glasgow.

ONE of the objective challenges faced by the Smith Commission is the quite ridiculously condensed timeline.

Devised in a panic and developed in a few weeks, the report has all the hallmarks of a rushed job that has been cobbled together to meet an unrealistic deadline.

A new constitutional arrangement such as this should have had much greater public engagement, debate and scrutiny.

Gordon Brown's near childish attempt at wrapping the idea in mock nationalist clothing by selecting St Andrew's Day and Burns Day as project markers is unworthy of a scholar but typical of a politician.

Another real difficulty faced by Smith is the highly charged political environment in which his commission had to operate; not just months after the referendum but the deliberations emerged at the commencement of a new fixed-term General Election in May.

Any recommendations will be scanned for their party advantage; any debate will be spun for votes.

Offering Scotland a new constitutional arrangement courtesy of the UK Government: to be debated and granted (in some form) only by Westminster, can only turn the spotlight on the subordinate status of Holyrood.

Resentments can be quickly turned into political responses.

TM Cross,

18 Needle Green,

Carluke.