IT was, said David Cameron, “a significant day for devolution” and a “major milestone in delivering a powerhouse parliament for Scotland”.
The Prime Minister’s statement that the fiscal framework underpinning Holyrood new powers had, after months of tortured negotiations, finally been agreed emerged on February 23.
The message was trumpeted from one end of Whitehall to the other: the mythical 'Vow' had finally been delivered.
So there can be little doubt that Cameron’s Downing Street neighbour heard it.
Yet as we reveal today, George Osborne evidently did not consider the matter closed.
Three weeks later, the Treasury raised an objection to the deal’s technical annex and Osborne refused to sign off on the financial architecture of the Scotland Bill.
This last minute veto was as astonishing as it was reckless.
A critical Holyrood vote was almost cancelled, something which could easily have created a constitutional crisis and changed the context of the Scottish election.
Given the sums involved - £200m is not going to break the Treasury - it appears to have been brinkmanship for its own sake, some political sport to test and tweak the SNP.
But if Osborne had got his way, it would have caused a real detriment to the Scotland budget.
To her credit, the First Minister refused to blink and he backed down.
Osborne’s behaviour was a classic example of perfidy on devolution.
It shows that rather than being joyously “delivered”, the Vow had to be forcefully extracted from Westminster, and we should not forget it.
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 here