Kemi Badenoch could strip Holyrood of powers in Tory devolution shake-up if she wins the next general election
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch plans to review the Scotland Act if her party wins the next general election, with the review considering whether Holyrood should lose some of its powers. Her team says changes would be considered if they could improve governance, marking a shift from the Conservatives’ previous “devolve and forget” approach and setting up a likely dispute with the SNP.
The proposal is being developed by Badenoch’s shadow cabinet, which has raised concerns about Scottish Government performance in areas including health, education, energy and the economy. Holyrood controls areas such as health, education and parts of taxation and welfare, while Westminster retains reserved powers; the UK Parliament remains legally sovereign, though the Sewel Convention says it does not normally legislate in devolved areas without consent. The article also notes that Scotland’s benefits spending is projected to rise from £6.8 billion last year to £8.9 billion by the end of the decade.
- Badenoch proposes reviewing Holyrood’s powers if the Conservatives win.
- The review would consider whether withdrawing powers could improve governance.
- Scottish benefits spending is forecast to reach £8.9 billion by decade’s end.
New here? Start with this
The Scottish Parliament, known as Holyrood, has controlled certain policy areas since 1999, including health, education and parts of taxation and welfare. The UK Parliament at Westminster retains legal authority, but by convention does not legislate in policy areas Holyrood controls without Scottish Parliament consent.
Kemi Badenoch is the leader of the Conservative Party. If her party wins the next general election, she plans to review the Scotland Act, which defines what powers Holyrood has, and consider whether those powers should be adjusted.
Badenoch's team points to concerns about the Scottish Government's performance in areas including health, education and the economy, and believes that adjusting Holyrood's powers could help improve governance. This represents a change from the Conservative Party's previous approach to devolution, and is likely to lead to significant disagreement with the Scottish National Party, which currently governs Scotland.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
The Conservatives argue that devolution should deliver effective governance in the areas Scots care most about—healthcare, education, and economic opportunity. When performance in these devolved areas appears to be lagging, with rising benefits spending and ongoing challenges, Westminster as the sovereign parliament has a legitimate responsibility to review whether the constitutional settlement is serving Scotland well. This isn't about reversing devolution arbitrarily, but ensuring taxpayer money is spent effectively and that power is exercised where it can do the most good.
The case against
Devolution represents a constitutional settlement that the British people endorsed, and reversing it based on electoral cycles would undermine the entire principle of Scottish self-government. The SNP, though controversial, has democratic legitimacy in Scotland—voters chose their government. Using Westminster's electoral victory and subjective performance judgments to strip away Scottish powers threatens the devolution principle, and any redistribution of powers should come through genuine Scottish consent, not centralised Westminster authority based on political preference.