THIS week, a committee of MPs led by Sir Bernard Jenkin said it was “highly regrettable” that there was so little consultation with devolved governments over the EU Withdrawal Bill. 

A bit more listening could have avoided the “power grab” stand-off between Holyrood and Westminster, he suggested.

It’s hard to disagree with him, and yet one can’t help wonder if both sides of the row, which is over whether powers returning from Brussels should go back to Westminster first or be devolved straight away, are rather thankful for it.

For Nicola Sturgeon’s SNP, acrimony with London makes it easier to whip up pro-independence sentiment. And let’s not forget that the Scottish Tory Party has made substantial gains of late from anti-independence voters who previously voted tactically for the SNP as the best chance of keeping Labour out. 

Upping the ante with the nats and pushing them onto more militant ground could well help Ruth Davidson hold onto these voters.

It’s not just Sturgeon who calls it a power grab. Labour too has voiced concerns that the spirit of the devolution settlement is being ignored.

But, while the pure constitutional issues are important, the debate has strayed too far away from bread-and-butter politics. If the SNP wants to make a convincing case against Westminster, it must do more to set out clear water between its own approach to post-Brexit governance and Westminster. 

Instead the party seems only able to sneer at the Tories’ shambolic approach, which, while perfectly justified, is not enough.

Jim Sillars has been right to identify the inconsistency of Sturgeon, opposing London hogging powers but being happy to leave them in Brussels.

And if the nationalists continue their love affair with the EU single market and offer a post-independence vision as conservative as the Growth Commission, the row will end up seeming rather pointless.