A LABOUR elder statesman has warned that Westminster ­Unionists may seek a second referendum if Scots vote narrowly for independence next year.

Former armed forces minister Adam Ingram believes MPs could try to reverse a Yes victory should public opinion swing back behind the Union.

The party stalwart reckons such moves may take place during the proposed two-year transition period between the vote in September 2014 and independence in 2016.

Mr Ingram, who retired at the previous UK General Election, said: "Why do we assume there is only going to be one referendum?

"Scottish members of parliament will continue after 2014. They will fight - possibly - for what they believed in before. And that would be the Union.

"The body politic itself - the people - may decide they want the politicians to reverse the decision. Do we listen to the people? Or do we listen to the parties?"

Mr Ingram was speculating that a Yes Victory would be very narrow and public opinion would wobble under the reality of tough post-referendum negotiations.

"It could be a very tight decision," the former East Kilbride MP said of the referendum vote. "Let's assume it's 51:49 in favour of secession, independence, separation, on a very low turn-out?

"Although people talk about this [referendum] as the biggest event for 300 years, it's only the beginning of an event."

Mr Ingram was speaking at a conference on defence and security at Glasgow University this weekend.

He was responding to a question from a prominent intelligence expert, former Foreign Office official Sandy Hardie, about what would happen to MPs during the transition period.

The former politician's remarks, however, will spark speculation about ultra-Unionists campaigning in the 2015 UK General Election on a ticket to reverse a Yes victory.

Mr Hardie said: "The 2015 election campaign could become a politically charged event in this context."

Experts at the conference quickly pointed out that the Edinburgh Agreement signed by First Minister Alex Salmond and Prime Minister David Cameron last year meant all sides would respect the referendum's results.

Daniel Kenealy, of Edinburgh University, one of the speakers at the conference, described a tight Yes vote on a low turn-out followed by a wobble in public opinion as a nightmare scenario. But he added: "I can't imagine a second referendum. Do we have one every couple of years?"

Mr Ingram's remarks may appear to mirror those of nationalists who have vowed to continue campaigning for independence even if they lose next year's referendum, especially if they do so narrowly. However, they did not reflect the official views of mainstream Unionists, or his own party.

A spokesman for Better Together last night said: "People in Scotland want their governments to focus on the issues that really matter to them: improving our schools and hospitals; keeping our streets safe; and looking after the public finances.

"We can't keep talking about the constitution forever. We need to win this referendum to put the question of separation to bed once and for all."

A Scottish Labour spokesman said: "We hope we can manage a decisive result that will allow us to get beyond the constitutional question and focus on the things that really matter to the people of Scotland."

A spokesman for Yes Scotland said: "We note that Mr Ingram is speculating about a Yes vote.

"The position is that both the Scottish Government and Westminster are bound to honour the terms of the Edinburgh Agreement - which is that the result of next year's September 18 vote will be respected and accepted as the will of the people of Scotland.

"We are confident there will be no doubt on the day and that a majority will vote Yes, reflecting that our nation has what it takes to be an independent country, and that Westminster simply isn't working for Scotland."