WHEN Better Together, the cross-party campaign to keep Scotland in the UK, hired devolution expert Jim Gallagher as an adviser last month it was seen as an attempt to nudge Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the Conservative towards a joint policy on handing Holyrood more powers.
Such a move, the theory went, would prove popular with voters who, according to survey after survey, seem to like the idea of a beefed-up Holyrood more than either the status quo or independence.
It would also help silence accusations from the Nationalists that any vague, conflicting promises of more powers would quickly melt away after a No vote.
Ken Macintosh's intervention in Scottish Labour's internal devo debate shows just how difficult it will be for the pro-UK parties to pledge more powers for Holyrood and convince voters they really mean it.
Labour's divisions over devolution threatened to overshadow the party's conference in Inverness last year and could do so again when members gather in Perth next month.
Remember, Mr Macintosh's staunch opposition to fully devolving income tax is only one half of the story Johann Lamont's devolution commission has to listen to. Public sector union Unison, for example, wants the party to embrace much deeper devolutuion - not just full income tax but elements of pension and energy policy too.
The Tories, meanwhile, are still in the early stages of drawing up their devo plans leaving only the LibDems with a fully fleshed policy, in their case for a federal UK with wide tax powers transferring to Edinburgh.
It may be the Better Together parties can do no more than promise to work together and hope that is enough to persuade voters of their rock-solid commitment to ...something.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article