To the undoubted appetite for second referendum, could I add a suggestion that serious preparatory work requires to be done (Why Yes vote may be one for the future, Letters, September 20). The nature of the relationship, after independence, of Scotland to the remainder of the UK, needs to be addressed, and serious consideration should be given to the constitutional idea of confederation rather than federation. Confederation means equal parliaments in Scotland and England; while any federal solution involves a parliament in Scotland always subsidiary to Westminster and capable of being abolished by Westminster. In effect, under confederation, the Scottish people would be invited to support the full independence of their parliament within the umbrella of the United Kingdom. This would be a new configuration altogether. It could be called the CBI – the Confederation of the British Isles.

Of course, this would mean Westminster ceding sovereignty to Scotland. There are useful precedents for this form of constitutional process. The prime example is the Statute of Westminster, 1931, by which Westminster lost its sovereignty over Canada and Australia. "Dominion status", conferred in 1931, later morphed into independence within the Commonwealth, which was applied successively to India and other former colonies in the post-war period.

All the above was part of the orderly dismantling of the British Empire through a consensual framework. That's what is needed now to answer the Scottish question. This process should involve all the current parliaments (sometimes called "assemblies") of the British Isles. Work needs to start on this soon, as a necessary prelude to a second referendum in Scotland.

The second issue is currency. The Irish happily used the pound sterling after they achieved independence for the Irish Republic. Not only did Westminster go along with this, but it decreed under the Ireland Act of 1949, that the Republic would not be treated as a foreign country. Scotland received no such benign treatment from Westminster when all three main UK parties, assisted by HM Treasury, conspired to prevent Scotland from using the pound sterling in the event of a democratic vote for independence, and Scots would have been treated as foreigners. However, this would not happen in a confederation, where the Irish precedent is likely to be followed.

The idea of "independence within the UK" (which is what confederation entails) was spoken to by the late Donald Dewar some time ago, but was never pursued. So it is perhaps significant that Kezia Dugdale has announced that Scottish Labour MPs and MSPs who support independence can openly campaign for this during any future referendum. At the same time she might specifically repudiate Ed Balls's despicable decision to join the then Coalition in refusing to let an independent Scotland use the pound.

It is crucial that the Scottish electorate is made aware of these options, and that they are publicly debated, prior to the next referendum. All politicians owe this to the electorate.

Randolph Murray

Rannoch