IF ANYTHING, the week following the Scottish elections have been more interesting that the weeks leading up to it.

The result was never in doubt but the d’Hondt system fought back, and despite increasing its vote share, number of votes and constituency seat share the SNP was denied a repeat of the majority they enjoyed with a lesser result in 2011. As I wrote last week, winning a majority in a parliamentary system specifically designed to stop one would be outstanding. Nevertheless, even with a SNP/ Green pro-independence majority (also an outstanding result) it makes it more likely that the next independence vote will be after 2021. Circumstances, however, may intervene and here we come to a hugely significant development in Scottish politics.

The Labour Party had a bad, bad night, but they are still standing and they have two choices. They can attempt another insincere listening exercise and bring forward another mishmash of a thousand-policy manifesto, once again failing to demonstrate what they stand for, or they can have a clear-out of all the deadwood candidates and policies, and radically address the key issue upon which they flounder – independence.

I am not suggesting they support independence, no one would believe them anyway, but in leading or rather fronting Project Fear they defined themselves as the party that doesn’t stand up for Scotland while the SNP simultaneously proved the opposite. Labour need to learn that you can’t be trusted to run the nation if all you do is put the nation, its people, its economy and its prospects down at every turn. Ruth Davidson, having helpfully relieved Labour of its position as Unionist cheerleader-in-chief, is about to find she has been handed a poison chalice.

At least Kezia could say she also disagreed with the Tories in Westminster. Davidson will have to defend Cameron and Osborne, and possibly Boris, at every FMQs. Labour in Scotland might just be about to wake up to an opportunity they were previously blind to, but that happens when you get kicked that hard. Call it a home rule epiphany if you like. Deputy Leader Alex Rowley, Former Deputy Leader Anas Sawar and former First Minister Henry McLeish have all been pushing for Labour to become the champions of home rule.

Ignoring the fact that only a few weeks ago Labour agreed that Scotland had one of the most powerful devolved parliaments in the world, apparently they now think there is room for a range of new devolved powers.

Rowley said “home rule”, with control of pensions, foreign affairs, defence and some taxes reserved but most other areas not should come under Holyrood’s remit. However, pensions (keeping our old folk fed, safe and warm), foreign affairs (representing ourselves to the EU and in trade negotiations), defence (not being forced into illegal wars or to pay for nuclear weapons) and the remaining taxation-based fiscal levers are actually the first powers and not the last powers you would want to control to create a fairer, safer, prosperous and successful nation.

However, Westminster would never allow home rule. Independence, we all agree, is a question for Scotland but federalism or devo max (says the House of Lords) would require a UK-wide referendum. On top of that the No vote splits roughly 50/50 between those that hope for true home rule and federalism, and dyed-in-the-wool, Westminster-centric Unionists. Splitting the No vote in two in a three-option referendum when one option can’t be delivered guarantees a win for Yes.

The EU referendum is now moving front and centre, and has provided the Tories with a case study in the difficulty of being the government in Westminster and opposition in Scotland. Firstly, Ruth Davidson campaigned on the ticket of being the only true champion of the union and now claims her 22 per cent of the vote provides a mandate to stop any future referendum, seeming to forget that with the SNP on 46.5 per cent of the vote and a Yes majority available she couldn’t stop the Parliament calling for another referendum if it wants to.

Secondly, her boss David Cameron has contradicted her, stating a Brexit would almost certainly lead to the break-up of the UK, thus acknowledging that a Brexit against the wishes of Scottish voters will mean a new referendum. He might be right, however, the UK would break up far more quickly if England was held in the EU by Scottish votes against its wishes (the Schadenfreude scenario) as several newspapers have suggested this week.

That is, however, statistically unlikely even with the 76 per cent stay vote in Scotland suggested by the latest poll, as even a one per cent win for leave in England would overwhelm a strong Scottish stay vote by relative population size.

Davidson’s overreaching hubris based on her obvious astonishment at losing less badly than in previous campaigns reminds me of the old saying about pride before a fall. I can’t decide if her claim that we have now passed peak SNP reminds me more of George Robertson’s “devolution will kill nationalism stone dead” or Jim Murphy’s “I am astonished at how easy it’s been to outwit the SNP”.

Looking at the numbers, firstly, Ruth Davidson’s 22 per cent falls well short of Margaret Thatcher’s popularity in Scotland as Thatcher never fell below 24 per cent of the vote, (1979 – 31.4 per cent, 1983 – 28.4 per cent, 1987 24 per cent). As for peak SNP, they won a majority on 45.4 per cent in 2011 and this time failed to do so on 46.5 per cent (up 1.1 per cent). Whereas peak Tory was in the seventies, the SNP vote share is still climbing and it’s clear that Davidson has a long way to go to be as popular with the Scottish electorate as Margaret Thatcher.

It’s worth noting that the SNP on 46.5 per cent in the constituencies seem to have recorded a higher percentage vote share than any other current European government. The current UK Tory majority was secured on a comparatively paltry 36.9 per cent vote. The real story of last week’s election was the SNP’s historic third term and the d’Hondt system doing what it was designed to do by checking the SNP. However, Scotland remains firmly on the road to independence and I feel that the EU referendum result and the SNP’s summer of independence campaign will define the timescale more than the actions of any Unionist party.