Is Holyrood fit for purpose?
Does Scotland need a Scottish Parliament that consistently fails to deliver for the public?
The recent Scottish leaders’ debates failed to achieve a satisfactory outcome: public confidence in Scotland’s political institutions is eroding. The question is not why turnout is low, but why confidence has been allowed to deteriorate so significantly.
The answer lies, in large part, in the record of the past two decades. After more than 20 years of devolved government, Scotland’s record against the core tests of effective administration is, at best, underwhelming: • Health services remain under sustained pressure.
• Education has slipped from its previously high standing.
• Economic performance is lacklustre.
• Infrastructure delivery, including ferries is inconsistent.
• Defence, critical to national resilience, is absent from meaningful discussion.
Taken together, this does not point to isolated shortcomings, it points to systemic failure. This is symptomatic of a political system that is no longer delivering the outcomes the public has a right to expect.
Ask people to name the achievements of the Scottish Parliament and the same answers emerge: free prescriptions and free university tuition.
Beyond these, there is a striking absence of widely recognised successes. After nearly 27 years, that is an indictment in itself.
A legislature of this scale and cost should be able to demonstrate far more.
Before discussion of a second independence referendum, there must first be an honest reckoning with Scotland’s existing system of government.
The public has a right to know what the Scottish Parliament costs in full – not just MSPs, but the wider apparatus of civil servants and advisers – and to question whether this represents value for money.
Indeed, the Scottish Parliament ties up in excess of £180 million per annum, maintaining the present system which could be redirected towards frontline priorities such as health, education, public services and defence, where the needs are urgent and undeniable.
If the current structure cannot demonstrate clear value, then fundamental change should not be off the table.
Equally, the electoral system warrants scrutiny.
Proportional representation may have merits, but it also allows individuals to be elected without securing direct voter preference in a constituency.
That raises legitimate concerns about accountability and standards of representation.
The Scottish electorate has a right to challenge the current political establishment, and equally a right to debate these issues openly and transparently.
Devolution was intended to strengthen governance in Scotland.
On the evidence of the past two decades, it is failing to do so. It is time for a serious and open debate about whether the Scottish Parliament is fit for purpose.
Or should we consider a different system, for example the appointment of mayors across Scotland’s diverse cities.
Alastair Torbet, Tighnabruaich.
More letters...
Hold praise for Kate Forbes until we get proper action on Ardrossan Harbour
Labour guilty of hypocrisy in the People's Palace saga
When will Scotland prosper?
Ian Lakin (Letters, April 29) concedes that the UK economy has contracted.
However, it seems that he is able to peer into the future and predict that, for an independent Scotland, matters would be two or three times worse.
Is it too much to hope that our unionist friends, gifted with second sight, can inform us when, by remaining in the Union, we will prosper?
Alan Carmichael, Glasgow.
Who’s better than SNP?
For years I’ve read letters from The Herald’s serial moaners, telling other readers how awful the SNP Scottish Government has been, and encouraging us to vote them out of office.
It is easy, but boring, to criticise as they do.
What none of these correspondents ever does is say for which party we should vote.
So, come on then, serial moaners, impart your wisdom and tell us which party we should be backing. And, most importantly, why.
I am still undecided regarding who I will vote for. I imagine that some other Herald readers are in the same position.
So make your letter content positive for a change, and influence us that way.
Tell readers a), which party we should vote for on May 7, and b), state your top three policy priorities to make Scotland better, and how they would be funded.
That will make more interesting reading for the rest of us.
W Lindsay, Erskine.
SNP: it’s not delivering
Is Scottish politics descending into all talk and no action?
The biggest risk is being taken by the SNP.
John Swinney seems besotted by the idea of independence.
However, the public must be told exactly what this entails… and it is not pretty.
The 2008 banking crash was a wake-up call to governments, revealing just how quickly things can go wrong.
Fast forward to 2026, and we can see the effects of the Iranian threats in the Strait of Hormuz.
If the current Iranian government is not deposed this threat will remain.
Then there is the growing unease over AI and its potential problems.
These may result in either extreme job losses, or even the collapse of the AI tech companies boom.
Either way, the result will be more extreme financial turmoil.
Into this maelstrom of dire consequences we find John Swinney, whose government cannot even build a ferry on time, or on budget.
He believes his party has the intellect to outwit the entire global economy and create a brand new state, with its own currency, out of almost nothing.
Which seems especially overconfident, given the poor state of Scotland's economy right now. Honesty is required from our politicians, and we must ask: is the SNP really delivering?
Dr Gerald Edwards, Glasgow.
Personable politicians needed
WE often forget that political life, at its heart, is about character.
Not performance, not presentation, not even policy, but the basic human qualities we recognise instantly in ordinary life.
Character reveals itself quickly. It doesn’t need help, and it doesn’t hide well.
You see it in the smile that reaches the eyes, and in the hand put forward to help without being asked.
My mum always said: “If you want to see someone’s character, look at how they treat the people they assume don’t matter.”
So if you’re at a rally or a debate, watch how the political figures treat the person who brings them a glass of water, or adjusts their mic.
That’s when you see the real character of the person asking for your vote.
Judith Campbell, Portree.
Reform will grow economy
When Ross Greer, co-leader of the Scottish Greens, was asked by Malcolm Offord of Reform UK whether he wanted more or fewer entrepreneurs like Lord Offord in Scotland, his answer was stunning – fewer!
The worrying thing about Mr Greer’s answer is that, while they wouldn’t be crass enough to admit it, the policies and voting records of John Swinney, Anas Sarwar and Alex Cole-Hamilton show they are pretty much in agreement with him.
The key question in this election is not, as some pretend, the constitution.
Instead, it is: ‘Do we want a growing economy, which can pay for public services and give our children hope for the future, or not?’
Without a welcoming environment for entrepreneurs to start and grow new businesses in Scotland, we can only look forward to worse public services and hopelessness.
Only Reform UK has that necessary focus on growing the economy, which can give us a worthwhile future.
Penny Ponders, Dunfermline.
Share