THE SNP's planned independence date of March 2016 should be rejected if it is not in the best interests of the UK, according to peers.
The Lords Constitution Committee recommended that UK ministers block the plan - even if there is a Yes vote in September.
The UK Government should "put the rest of the UK's interests first," the committee's chair, Baroness Jay of Paddington, the daughter of former Labour Prime Minister James Callaghan, said.
Earlier this year, the Herald reported that a UK minister had warned that a Yes vote would not necessarily guarantee independence.
The senior figure said that the "status quo" could be maintained if negotiations between the UK and Scottish governments went badly.
In their new report on Scottish independence published yesterday, peers say there is no "legal or constitutional reason" to sign up to the SNP's timetable. They also recommend Scottish politicians be barred from acting on the UK side during independence negotiations.
But Scots MPs should remain at Westminster until independence day, although they could be prevented from voting on issues outside Scotland, adds the report.
Gordon Banks, Shadow Scotland Office Minister, said: "This report from the House of Lords once again confirms that the remainder of the UK would continue as the successor state, meaning that Scotland would have to renegotiate its terms of entry to a number of organisations, including the EU."
SNP MP Angus MacNeil said: "The House of Lords is an undemocratic anachronism stuffed to the gunnels with over 800 unelected peers of the realm who answer to no electors and are there because of privilege or patronage. To be lectured by them about timetables and for democratic processes is something that could only happen in Westminster. ''
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