The British government may be forced to postpone an announcement on the formal title of Northern Ireland's new Police Service while intense discussions continue with the SDLP and the Irish Government.
It had been expected that Mr Adam Ingram, the Minister of State, would table the government's proposal - in response to Ulster Unionist and SDLP amendments - today, ahead of tomorrow's final session of the standing committee on the Police (Northern Ireland) Bill.
However, amid signs of growing nationalist alarm about London's possible acceptance of the general thrust of the Ulster Unionist amendment - underlining that the RUC is not being disbanded, despite the scrapping of its "Royal" title - the indications at Westminster last night were that Mr Ingram might delay a final decision until the report stage of the Bill, scheduled for next Tuesday.
The SDLP meanwhile has suffered a setback in its attempt to reinstate the Patten proposals for the rules governing flags and emblems to be associated with the new police service.
At yesterday's sitting of the standing committee on the Bill, the British government rejected SDLP amendments which would have prevented the flying of the Union flag over police buildings and land - and would have ensured that any emblem for the new service would be, as Patten proposed, "entirely free from any association with any emblem of Ireland or the United Kingdom".
With attention already switching to the British government's expected decision on the formal title for the new service, nationalist unease was further increased when Mr Ingram told the committee: "We recognise we may be at variance with Patten . . . but Patten wasn't the fount (sic) of all wisdom."
Mr Eddie McGrady, the SDLP chief whip, argued that the government's position was "contrary to the letter and spirit of what Patten intended". But Mr Ingram said it was important to note that Patten had said the RUC name - "and to some extent the badge" - had become politicised.
The government had accepted Patten's headline proposal that the name "must be changed" and that the badge would also change. However, on symbols, it did not accept that there need be "complete neutralisation" from both traditions, subject to the provisions of the Good Friday accord for equality and consent and acceptance of the equal validity of both traditions.