THE pro-UK parties' late pledge to deliver more powers for Holyrood had "zilch" impact on the result of the referendum, a former SNP leader has claimed.
Gordon Wilson said the Yes campaign lost last September because it failed to persuade people of the economic argument for independence.
His views put him odds with former SNP leader Alex Salmond, who has said the so-called 'vow,' made by the Better Together parties days before the vote, had a decisive effect.
Mr Salmond will assess the campaign in his book, The Dream Shall Never Die, due to be published later this month.
Asked what impact the vow made, Mr Wilson said: "Zilch. I think it's a myth.
"I've never found people pay too much attention to constitutional proposals, they tend to focus on how they would do economically.
"It was not Better Together that won, it was 'better off' that won."
He added: "I've a different view on that from Alex. He may well be right, that's as far as my concession would go."
Mr Wilson was speaking at the launch of a new 'strategy for independence,' issued by his Options for Scotland think tank.
It said the Yes campaign's biggest "weak point" was its failure to spell out an economic vision for the next 20 years.
Mr Wilson said the SNP should only press for a fresh referendum at a point when opinion polls have indicated at least 55 per support for independence for a sustained period.
He said the timescale for a second vote "lies between five to 20 years".
He called on the SNP to create a special research and communications unit to campaign for independence separately from from parliamentary party, which he said was too focused on elections.
The former MP, who led the Nationalists throughout the 1980s, played down the prospect of an EU referendum triggering a vote on independence, saying England was unlikely to back withdrawal.
Mr Wilson said Labour could become part of a pro-independence alliance if the party suffers a resounding defeat in May's General Election and has to reform afterwards.
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