With just eight months to go until the vote and the polls narrowing , the Scottish independence referendum (an issue the NS has covered in detail  for years) is finally receiving the attention it deserves. The FT has run an excellent series  on the subject this week and the Spectator (another title that has long followed the issue) devotes its cover  this week to the danger of a victory for the nationalists.
One overlooked question raised by former Tory MSP Brian Monteith on ConservativeHome today  is that of the status of Westminster's 59 Scottish MPs following a Yes vote in September. The current assumption on all sides is that they will be elected as usual in May 2015 before leaving the Commons after the post-referendum negotiations conclude and Scotland becomes an officially independent country (24 March 2016 is the date slated by the SNP, just in time for the Scottish Parliamentary election on 5 May 2016).
But it is easy to see, as Monteith writes, how this could create a "constitutional crisis the like of which has never been seen". The Tories and the right-wing media would revolt against a Labour (or Labour-Lib Dem) government dependent on Scottish MPs for its majority after May 2015, denouncing it as an illegitimate imposition on the rest of the UK. Conservative peer Howard Flight has already suggested  that they should stand down at the election in the event of an independence vote; many others in his party are likely to take the same view. Ed Miliband, meanwhile, could face the prospect of losing his majority just 10 months after he becomes prime minister.
Then there is the question of whether the 59 Scots should be allowed to take part in Westminster votes. Would it be acceptable for them to pass laws governing a country that they will soon no longer belong to? (It is, essentially, the West Lothian question in a more extreme form.)
There are no easy answers to these questions but just to pose them is a reminder of how Scottish independence would leave Westminster in entirely uncharted territory.