THERE are very few things that draw the attention of the UK commentariat to Holyrood.

It takes something truly big to make the top of its news agenda – scandal at the top of government, criminal investigation, serious and sustained conflict between Holyrood’s heaviest hitters, the dethroning of a truly senior figure.

It seemed the scandal surrounding the allegations about Alex Salmond’s conduct and the Scottish Government’s handling of these had every one of those aspects.

The former went through a criminal trial resulting in no convictions. The latter was subject to two separate processes – a Holyrood inquiry and an independent probe specifically into Nicola Sturgeon’s role. What did she know, when did she know it, what did she do, what did she fail to do?

Those questions, perhaps more than any others, came to dominate discourse around the investigations into the most serious misconduct allegations ever involving Scotland’s devolved legislature.

READ MORE: MSPs vote against motion of no confidence in Nicola Sturgeon

James Hamilton’s investigation found Sturgeon had not broken the Ministerial Code. The Committee on the Scottish Government’s Handling of Harassment Complaints found she might have, but that it was up to Hamilton to really decide, and he already had. The findings of the cross-party committee were not unanimous, with the SNP members disagreeing with several points.

Yesterday Sturgeon survived yet further challenge when a vote of no confidence brought by the Tories failed, as it was bound to after those findings and on the strength of parliamentary arithmetic.

There’s been nary a UK news media platform that hasn’t covered this in recent weeks, leading up to the fevered speculation seen on Monday morning. By teatime it was already falling down the news agenda as Sturgeon was cleared of a breach.

How serious, then, was this interest in the handling of harassment complaints? Could it be that the party politics, not the equalities issues, were really the focus? Are we able only to view complex issues of policy, process, personal liability and professional responsibility in Scotland through the single lens of what it might mean for independence? Is there really nothing to consider about conduct, consent and confidentiality?

The inquiries – months-long and punctuated by leaking so frequent and egregious that it prompted the original complainers to release a statement through Rape Crisis Scotland – must amount to something. Deputy First Minister John Swinney has said it’s clear that the women had been let down and that he’s “absolutely determined” to ensure “this does not happen again”.

Improvements, we are told, are forthcoming and will also be drawn from recommendations from Laura Dunlop QC’s externally-led review of the procedure for handling harassment complaints.

Scottish politics guru Professor Sir John Curtice has said the committee’s focus on Sturgeon and the Ministerial Code, not on the strength of the complaints procedure, has itself “mis-served” the public. “The Scottish Government introduced a harassment procedure rather too hastily which was inadequately specified,” he told the BBC. “What the Government needs to do now is come up with a new procedure that almost entirely has to be independent. So, if any civil servant in the future makes a complaint about any minister, however powerful, it is adjudicated not within the civil service but outside. That is obviously a crucial lesson. If we focus on that, we will indeed have found a way of improving the way we are governed in future.”

​READ MORE: WATCH: 'They should just go': Patrick Harvie slams Holyrood inquiry MSPs

We’re not finished here, not by a long chalk. Serious questions remain about how this whole sorry mess began and developed. There’s serious concern about where this takes us as a society on our attitudes to and actions over sexual harassment and misconduct reporting, and about the robustness and operation of the Parliament we rely on.

Hamilton suggested the original leaking of the complaint against Salmond to the Daily Record is a matter for police (the former SNP leader is likely to address this in his statement today); Greens co-leader Patrick Harvie has suggested any MSP who has leaked inquiry-related material should resign.

“This investigation began with an extremely serious issue,” he said in the vote of no confidence debate.

“The mishandling of an investigation into sexual harassment allegations. I honestly wish that everyone’s focus had remained on that issue.

“What should have been a serious inquiry has descended into farce.”