ANYONE who hoped the landmark vote on Scottish independence would magically seal the constitutional genie back into its bottle has seen their wishes disappear in a puff of smoke this week.

In the Houses of Pantomime, oops, sorry Parliament, Widow Twanky Hague has laid his EVEL plans before fellow MPs (well the 200 who bothered to show up) and so fire up the constitutional reform rocket once more.

EVEL – or English votes for English laws – is an apt acronym, prompting cries of "boo" and "hiss" from its detractors.

Leading his band of unmerry men and women is opposition leader Ed 'Ugly Brother' Miliband, who is slapping his thigh (but would probably rather be slapping Widow Hague's face) at the prospect of EVEL spoiling Labour's chances of governing in England.

He is accusing the Widow and his chorus of Conservative MPs of putting party interest before the national one in rushing through proposals to change how laws are made in parliament.

If the Widow has his way, with one rub of his lamp, Scottish MPs would be banned from voting in Westminster on matters that are devolved north of the border, such as health and education.

Immediately, you can see why Brother Ed might oppose such a plan: without the help of its Scottish MPs, a future Labour government might struggle to get its domestic policies passed by an English chamber with a Conservative bias.

To the audience watching in the stalls, (can I have a Wagon Wheel this year, please), the row is probably about as captivating as watching your turkey roast in the oven.

For starters (make mine prawns and avocado), it's complicated (think of the most elaborate instructions that come with a Christmas toy and multiply by 100).

It sounds simple to exclude Scottish MPs (and Welsh and Northern Irish MPs too) from votes on English matters, but it's tricky to define what amounts to solely English legislation.

For example, any law that involves a government department altering its spending in England will have a knock-on effect on spending in other parts of the UK, so surely they should have a say?

You can see why you might rather peel a vat of Brussels sprouts than strip the layers back in this constitutional conundrum.

Nevertheless it is an issue that isn't going to go away. The dilemma ain't new: it's been lingering on the back burner for years. Sometimes referred to as the 'West Lothian Question' after MP Tam Dalyell (the Labour member for West Lothian) highlighted the problem in a 1977 parliamentary debate on devolution with this poser: "For how long will English constituencies and English Honourable members tolerate ... at least 119 Honourable Members from Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland exercising an important, and probably often decisive, effect on English politics while they themselves have no say in the same matters in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland?"

Gladstone saw the challenge back as1886. During his speech on the first Irish Home Rule bill he said: "If Ireland is to have domestic legislation for Irish affairs they cannot come here for English or Scottish affairs."

In the wake of the Scottish referendum, enhanced powers have been ceded to the Scottish Parliament , fuelling calls for the West Lothian Question to be settled for once and all.

Any democrat must see that this needs to be resolved. The real question is how to do it. What would be wrong would be to draft some rushed scheme without care. During the referendum campaign, the consensus both north and south of the border was that we wanted to remain as a united kingdom.

There were calls for change, for more powers to be given to cities and enthusiastic talk about building a secondary powerhouse in the north of England to balance the super-city that is London.

EVEL might be the solution, but there may be other, better, ways to enhance fair and democratic representation for the English in England.

That's why a constitutional convention should be set up, incorporating all the political parties and other interested groups including businesses, universities and the church. Ordinary people should be canvassed too.

This is what happened in Scotland: the road to devolution was a long and considered one. And it has been a success.

England needs to acknowledge this with an almighty: "Oh yes it has" and find a way to follow suit.