Sturgeon: unionist parties must deliver more powers or risk alienating majority of Scots

She dismissed her earlier pledge that an independence referendum is a "once-in-a-lifetime" event, insisting that the timetable for the next referendum will be set by the people of Scotland.

Ms Sturgeon welcomed the Conservative Party's pledge to use its published devolution manifesto as "a floor rather than a ceiling" and urged Labour to do likewise.

But Labour insisted it is not going to "pre-negotiate the outcome" of the Smith Commission on Scottish devolution, insisting new ideas must be balanced against established proposals debated by successive governments.

Ms Sturgeon said: "I believe as passionately today as I did before the referendum that Scotland should be, and will be in future, an independent country.

"But I also accept unreservedly that independence was not the choice of the Scottish people on September 18."

She recognised that the Smith Commission will not deliver independence, which will only happen "when a majority of the people of this country vote for that in a referendum".

"I believe that will happen, but when it happens is a matter for people in this country," she said.

Conservative MSP Murdo Fraser asked if Ms Sturgeon meant her pre-referendum statement that the referendum "is a once-in-a-lifetime vote".

Ms Sturgeon replied that "the people of Scotland are in charge" and that "it is not for politicians on either side of this debate to dictate the destination of the debate".

"We have seen at least one poll since the referendum showing 66% support for devo-max - devo-max defined as all powers short of defence and current affairs," she said.

"So, that is where public opinion is and if that public opinion is not met in terms of what the Westminster parties are now prepared to sign up to then I think that will be unforgivable.

"I think the people of Scotland will not be prepared to forgive that."

She pledged to engage constructively with the Smith Commission, recognising that the SNP "won't get everything we ask for", and that issues such as defence, security, intelligence, the currency, citizenship and foreign affairs will remain at Westminster.

But she said other parties must now go "substantially further than their currently-published proposals".

"I was encouraged by comments by the Conservatives that their proposals should be seen as 'a floor not as a ceiling'.

"I think that was a welcome comment to make and I hope others will take a similarly constructive approach.

"I hope we get some clarity from Labour, whose proposals have been widely described as the weakest of every party."

She asked Labour constitution spokesman Drew Smith if he also regards Labour's devolution proposals as "a floor rather than a ceiling".

Mr Smith said: "We're not going to pre-negotiate an outcome to the Smith Commission that should rightly take place within the Smith Commission."

He added: "There are issues that have been raised in the context of the independence debate which showed an explosion in engagement in ideas and that should now inform what happens next, I agree.

"But there are also issues that have been debated for longer over the period of successive governments."

He continued: "The proposals which we have made to Lord Smith represent Labour's view but we are absolutely committed to engaging with those with alternative perspectives and especially to hearing new ideas on matters which we have not considered previously.

"The principles my party will now continue to apply to this process have been outlined before and they remain.

"This process is about enhancing and entrenching devolution within the UK.

"People in Scotland voted for a strengthened parliament working in partnership with the rest of Britain, not in opposition and not in competition to it.

"That means that we must continue Scotland's representation in the UK parliament, that issue was decided conclusively in the referendum.

"It is also our position that the continuation of the Barnett Formula should not be put at risk by fiscal proposals that will leave Scotland worse off than it is now."

Ms Sturgeon put pressure on Scottish Labour leadership candidate Sarah Boyack to set out whether she thought Labour's proposals to the Smith Commission were far-reaching enough.

She said: "Does she think that Labour's submission to Lord Smith's commission goes far enough or are there areas where she would hope to see it develop over the next period?"

Ms Boyack replied: "We're never going to be able to make Nicola Sturgeon happy with our submission. We know that."

She called for a process of "double devolution", not only from Westminster to the Scottish Parliament but from Holyrood to local councils.

"Our vision for local government is to see decisions about local communities taken locally," she said.

"There are lots of ideas in our report and rather than complaining about us not going far enough, I hope that the SNP benches will take this opportunity to look at new powers for local government, will look at the opportunities that come through the Smith Commission and will support Labour's proposals on powers for a purpose."

SNP MSP Annabelle Ewing called on Labour to be more radical in its proposals, referencing former Labour leader Johann Lamont's resignation attack on Westminster colleagues who she said treated the Scottish party as a "branch office".

Ms Ewing said: "I would appeal to the Labour Party to take the opportunity it now has to raise its sights and to be radical in its thinking, for surely the Labour Party in Scotland does not want Scotland to continue to be treated simply as a branch office of Westminster, a situation which no-one could reasonably describe as the best of both worlds."

Liberal Democrat MSP Tavish Scott criticised the tone of the debate and the focus placed on the Labour leadership election.

He said: "I'd rather hoped this had been a debate about the Smith Commission but instead it seems to be a debate about embarrassing the Labour Party."

Lord Smith had called on party leaders not to try to bind the hands of their negotiators in the process, Mr Scott said.

He added: "It certainly doesn't seem to me today that the tone that has come out of the Nationalist benches, led by the Deputy First Minister, has helped in any way.

"The Deputy First Minister did say we should not prejudice Smith and then she went on exactly to do that in her remarks in seeking, and I quote again from her remarks, "clarity from Labour".

Mr Fraser added: "The problem with this nationalist view of devo-max is that this is not an arrangement compatible either with a federal UK, or for that matter any sort of continuing UK state.

"If devo-max represents independence in all but name, this is what was rejected in the referendum just a few weeks ago, and Nationalists have to learn to live with that result."