Since devolution, it has been hard to find Scotland portrayed day-to-day on the UK news agenda.
So far in 2012, Scotland has been dominating the agenda.
This week's meeting between David Cameron and Alex Salmond collided in the news cycle with Rangers Football Club falling into administration. With Rangers' long association with the Union flag, the timing for the 'unionist' cause is not so good.
That pro UK cause seems to have been the campaign that dare not speak its name until now. The case and the cry for nationalism has been making all the running since the Holyrood Parliament was formed. The Scottish electorate has been edging towards the SNP since 1999 and gave the party its own majority in the last devolved poll.
And during that time Alex Salmond has carefully courted 'Middle England' through the Telegraph and the Mail with a message designed to appeal as much to his own electoral base as to the Little England tendencies within politics south of the border. It's been working.
The pro Britain campaign has not got off the ground. It needs to and quickly. And it needs to be a campaign about YES to Britain and not NO to independence.
The pro Britain campaign should not waste any time on fighting plans to extend the electoral franchise to younger voters aged 16. That's such a cobwebby idea. It needs to have a better digital strategy than the independence campaign - and it can. 2012 is going to be filled with cool, iconic reasons to celebrate the UK. That must be the backdrop.
The pro Britain campaign needs to engage at every level from business to community groups.
All the polls suggest there is no majority in Scotland for independence but the 'devo max' concept - more powers for Holyrood with continued ties to the UK - seems to have a large chunk of support. It might even fit the federal UK model the Lib Dems have argued for years.
But up until now all the UK wide parties have appeared to shun the idea with the assumption that Alex Salmond - with his policy of 'gradualism' - would be happy with a devo max outcome in a three option referendum. More power, more voice. One more nudge towards eventual independence.
But this week the prime minster appears to have opened up the debate indicating a form of 'devo max' may be offered from London - but only after the referendum settles Scotland's position within or without the UK. A big bargaining chip has just been placed on the table. But make no mistake - it's a real gamble. For the First Minister is already calling this 'jam tomorrow' from London.
Therefore the case needs to be made.
The PM - and Rangers Football Club - have an uphill struggle. Both of them seem up for their fight. Let battle commence.
Follow Iain Anderson on Twitter: www.twitter.com/iain_w_anderson
Carla Buzasi: The Week That Was: A Sunday Sun and Scotland
Scottish independence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Scottish independence | Politics | The Guardian
BBC News - Scottish independence: David Cameron in referendum ...
BBC News - Scottish independence: Oil fund 'could be worth £30bn'
Scottish Referendum: Cameron Vows To Fight Independence ...
Scottish independence: David Cameron in referendum offer
Politics News: 'Grey vote' could decide result of Scottish independence ...
SCOTTISH INDEPENDENCE: I'M READY TO FIGHT FOR A UNITED KINGDOM SAYS CAMERON
Martin Rowson on David Cameron's Scottish devolution promises – cartoon
We are stronger together, Cameron to tell Scotland as he warns of fears over ...
A Scottish Assembly was mooted by Ted Heath - when visiting Scotland, of course - in the 1970s, but nothing more was heard about it.
Labour promised a Scottish Assembly ('a real Parliament' their election literature said) in the October election of 1974, but when in power they dragged their feet, covered up the McCrone Report which revealed that an independent Scotland would be extremely wealthy, proposed a referendum on devolution instead of keeping their promise, allowed their MPs to campaign for rejection, placed a mandatory 40% turnout obstacle in the way of implementation of a 'yes' vote, and stuck to that after the 'yes' vote had won.
And at that same referendum, the former Prime Minister, Alec Douglas-Home, urged Scots to vote 'no' because the Tories would give Scotland a parliament with more powers. From the unionists, it's been promises, lies, prevarication, threat, scare stories, all the way.
Cameron simply had an 'Alec Douglas-Home' moment.
Scotland has had it up to here with Westminster con tricks - of any of the Unionist parties.
Can I advise you to do one thing.
Look closely at the press coverage, with particular reference to the front pages on the morning of the 2007 election. The pro-Union fanaticism on display will make you rethink. Its not that the Union argument hasn't been put. You must understand that it is being rejected. Re-stating the threadbare arguments on display here will not work for you.
And...
Where were you folk on 2003 when four hundred years of union of the crowns was ignored?.
Let me tell you. Running scared of the Scot Nats.
Now you want to save a union you could not celebrate? Kind of pathetic.
The independence SNP will settle for (in referendum question) will be federal status within the United Kingdom.
Be careful what you fight to protect - it may not be under attack.
Being a little Independent is like being a Little Pregnant. Its a Binary State. You are or you are not.
The entire raison d'etre of the SNP is to ensure that Scotland once more resumes our position as an Independent Nation. Not as a Federal State.
Had The Labour UK government not gerrymandered the 1979 Referendum, and there had been a Devolved Scottish Assembly to protect this land from the depredations of the Thatcher Years, things may concieveably have been much different and a Federal Model closer to reality.
We've learned. That's why, in an electoral system set up by Labour to ensure that there could never be a Nationalist government, Alex Salmond is the only politician in this country with a majority.
So, hardly an unbiased organisation then and actually quite unlikely to be anything other than, well, "Pro" the Party Line ? Perhaps a starting statement to that effect would have been Legal, Decent, Honest and Truthful ?
This is a very poor piece that skirts over the issues with old canards and unsubstantiated statements and its only accuracy lies in the active suggestion that the "pro" Union campaign is in shambolic disarray.
His comments on Rangers FC and its problems are clearly made from the viewpoint of somebody who knows absolutely nothing about either Rangers or indeed Scotland other than where one goes in August for the Grice Shooting and The Fringe Dahling.
http://www.ciceroforum.com/conf_speakers.php?eid=21
What interest does this corporate man have in preventing an independent Scotland?
Have you noticed that HuffP0 seem to be against Scotland's independence?
We did get Thatcher, however what "good things" she did for us up here is still unclear.
I don't want to see the union break apart. However, I cannae tholl a Scotland where our poor and unemployed are forced to work without compensation at Tesco, where incompetent bankers get millions, but education, benefits, and health care is cut.
Let the South be free to vote as they will. But so must we.
F&F!