ON this day 300 years ago, the Act of Union came into effect, cementing a marriage of sorts between Scotland and England. On this day 10 years ago, the British people went to the polls and by a huge majority voted Tony Blair's Labour government into power. Any celebration of either event today is likely to be distinctly muted. Mr Blair, who has already outstayed his welcome in Downing Street, is expected finally to announce his resignation within weeks. As for the Union, it has rarely looked so shaky since the day the treaty was signed and the bells of St Giles Cathedral rang out the tune to "Why should I be so sad on my wedding day?". There is an irony here, bitter or sweet depending on your viewpoint. Without the Blair government, there would have been no devolution settlement for Scotland and Wales. Many in his own party opposed it and the deciding argument was that it would draw the sting of nationalism and shore up the Union. But for a stitch in time saves nine, substitute another sewing metaphor: the unravelling seam.

What went wrong? There is much in the Blair legacy for him to take pride in: the minimum wage, peace and a political settlement in Northern Ireland, lifting many children out of poverty, better maternity rights, more nursery education, low inflation and unemployment, a stable economy. After nearly two decades when Scotland's predomi-nantly left-of-centre electorate felt disenfranchised, the political weather seemed set fair for Labour. But disillusion set in, aggravated by the death of Donald Dewar, controversy around Henry McLeish and disappointment in the calibre of MSPs. The sense that Scotland had been sold a pig in a poke was reinforced by the decision of the talented Scots who now pack the cabinet to stick with Westminster politics. Jack McConnell's arrival at Bute House brought a period of stability but little spark. And when many of Labour's grassroots supporters in Scotland were affronted, first by the disastrous invasion of Iraq, and subsequently by hasty decisions over Trident and nuclear power, instead of giving voice to that dismay, Mr McConnell chose loyalty to his leader. In return, instead of ringing endorsements, he has been undermined persistently and briefed against by factions within his party.

In recent months, as Mr Blair's authority began unravelling and the government was mired in the cash- for-honours investigation, the situation has deteriorated further. In his seeming determination to reach his 10th anniversary, the Prime Minister has put his legacy above his party's fate. In Scotland, it has left Labour staring down the barrel of defeat. The more major decisions were pushed through against Scottish mainstream public opinion, the more questions were asked of the relevance and benefit of the Union. And instead of taking the constitution out of the argument by promising to review the devolution settlement, it, and Iraq, have been allowed to dominate the campaign to the virtual exclusion of all the policies controlled by Holyrood.

Any balanced assessment must conclude the Act of Union has served Scotland well. While respecting Scotland's distinctive judicial, educational and religious institutions, it permitted a Scotland freed of trading constraints to prosper and enabled Scots to play key roles in the shaping of Great Britain. The late twentieth century brought a long, slow decline, temporarily offset by regional aid and inward investment. Now there are signs of fresh growth but Scotland's deep disenchantment with the Blair government, following the wilderness years under the Tories, highlights the question of what sort of nation we want. Like most Scots, The Herald remains to be convinced that constitutional divorce is the answer. However, even the best marriages benefit from periodic renegotiation.