Are we shortly to witness another twist in the history of the office of Secretary of State for Scotland? Gordon Brown, who is to be Prime Minister in a fortnight, is apparently considering whether to give the post full-time status once more. Tony Blair made it a part-time job in his clumsy reshuffle of June, 2003 when it was decided that Alistair Darling, the Transport Secretary, would also speak for Scotland in cabinet. Douglas Alexander holds both the transport and Scottish briefs at present but that might change after Mr Brown replaces Mr Blair.

It is not necessary to be a political anorak to appreciate why Mr Brown should be exercised by the post's standing. He is said to be appalled by the dispute between the SNP administration at Holyrood and Downing Street over the failure of the government in London to keep its devolved counterpart in Edinburgh informed about the memorandum of understanding with Tripoli over the repatriation of Libyan prisoners. The implications for Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi, the Lockerbie bomber (still not entirely clear) gave the dispute an added edge.

Mr Brown seems to think that a full-time Scottish Secretary, liaising between London and Edinburgh to keep both informed of developments they should know about, and acting as an honest broker between the two when necessary, would avoid such rows and embarrassments (for Downing Street) in the future. Relations between the two have not always been smooth, even when the government in Scotland was led by Labour. It seemed inevitable there would be a fallout when the Nationalists formed the government at Holyrood and Labour, behaving as the main party of the Union, held most of the purse strings, and power over reserved matters, at Westminster.

It just so happened that Mr Blair's government handed Alex Salmond, the First Minister, the initiative by its mishandling of the Libyan memorandum negotiations, which kept Scotland out of a loop it should have been in. With further turbulence likely, Mr Brown will clearly be anxious not to hand Mr Salmond other gifts. Just as devolution is an evolving process, the role of Scottish Secretary must also change with the times. It has been the subject of several alterations in status since its creation in 1885. Whether the change Mr Brown seems minded to make would be right is open to question.

Scotland certainly needs a voice in cabinet at Westminster to represent its (potentially conflicting) interests and a minister with whom it can negotiate and seek clarification on a range of matters, reserved as well as devolved. But should that person be full-time? It was having a limited amount of work that led to the post being made part-time and the Scotland Office being downgraded. Is the workload suddenly bigger? There is certainly a new edge to it. That does not mean there are more red boxes to get through. Surely it is as important that the incumbent has the correct attitude to the job, which means doing it in as open and as constructive a way as possible, taking account of the interests of both partners (and their electorates) in the new devolution settlement.

That, more than time spent occupying the post, is what will count for future arrangements. Unless or until he has a referendum on independence (and depending on the outcome), Mr Salmond must work within the grain of the Union and so he, too, must be constructive. He is already talking of the devolved parliaments and assemblies of Britain co-operating in their dealings with Westminster. If there is to be a full-time Secretary of State, it is worth exploring whether the remit should also include Wales and Northern Ireland.