Huh? I thought he had resigned. Perhaps someone will correct me, but I had the impression that Alex Salmond lost a historic vote last week. He gave an emotional press conference on Friday morning accepting defeat – and by the evening he was gone. He was off to spend his declining years doing something productive, we gathered, like knitting egg cosies or mastering the Guardian extra-fiendish Sudoku.

And then blow me down – he pops up on our televisions again, saying that he feels the people of Scotland have been “betrayed”, and that it may be necessary to hold another of these blooming referendums. Another one? He’s spent the last year blathering on about how this is a one-and-only turning point in the history of Scotland.

Jowls throbbing with passion, he had warned his audiences that they would never have such a chance again in their lifetimes. This was it. Now or never. Do or die. Friends, this is our time. That was his message. And now he seems to think that the poor old people of Scotland should be made to vote again and again until they come up with the right answer. Alex, old horse: what part of No don’t you understand?

The Yes campaign seemed to me to have all sorts of unfair advantages. They had the excitement and buzz of having that very word, “yes”, as the answer to the referendum question; so that a profoundly negative and destructive act – the break-up of Britain – could be cast as something new and exciting.

They had the Labour Party in Scotland in a state of meltdown, with Ed Miliband’s ratings lower among Scots than those of David Cameron. Poor Miliband was so invertebrate in his campaigning that he contrived to make Gordon Brown – probably the least successful prime minister of the past 100 years – look relatively charismatic.

The Yes campaign had ensured that only people in Scotland could vote on the future of our country – excluding even the vast numbers of Scots who live and work in London, many of whom were not happy at the idea of becoming foreigners. The Yessers were working with the grain of general public disgruntlement at the “Westminster” elite and old-fashioned politics.

They had all this going for them and they still managed to lose, and lose big. It wasn’t close. It was a lead, for the Noes, of 10.6 per cent. The question is settled for a generation, surely. I mean, for 20 or 30 years at least. The people have spoken, and they have plumped for Britain; and thank heavens for that.

Now is the time we should be talking about the future of Britain and the colossal potential of British business and British technology and British universities, and all the wonderful things that we British people are going to do together; and here is Salmond back on the telly, only four days later, claiming that there needs to be some kind of re-run, and saying he still wants to get divorced. Why the hell?

David Fuller's view

Alex Salmond can be a clever and articulate spokesman.  By promising milk and honey for poorer Scots, while fanning the dark side of historic ‘Braveheart’ resentments against the English, and patronising or bullying those who opposed him, he might have even succeeded in breaking up the United Kingdom had commonsense not prevailed. 

That would have been far better for Alex Salmond and the SNP, than for residents of Scotland or anyone else in the United Kingdom.  He regarded Scotland as his fiefdom.  Having failed to win the election, he also lost credibility by suggesting that a revote should be held because his people had been deceived.  This is demagoguery from a narcissistic leader who has lost touch with reality.  Politicians who suddenly gain considerable power are prone to demagoguery because they believe in themselves rather than their citizens.    

Right now the UK is going through a creative process of devolution and federalisation.  It will be bumpy but if it remains in the right hands, it should also be productive.