Badenoch calls for scrutiny of Scotland’s record under devolution
Kemi Badenoch has challenged the assumption that devolution is inherently beneficial, arguing that governments should be judged by what they deliver rather than where power sits. The article supports her call to question Scotland’s record under devolution and says the issue deserves a wider debate about how Britain should be governed.
Badenoch’s pamphlet, *The Right Way*, points to Scotland’s educational decline and recent PISA results, which the article says show England ahead on key measures. It also cites concerns over ferries, the NHS, policing, drug deaths and rising benefit costs after 19 years of SNP government. The writer suggests an independent inquiry or royal commission could examine whether devolution itself contributes to poor outcomes.
- Badenoch has questioned whether devolution delivers better government.
- The article points to Scotland’s education and public services.
- It proposes an independent review of devolution’s record.
New here? Start with this
Devolution refers to powers being transferred from central government to regional bodies. Scotland has had its own parliament since 1999 with control over education, health and justice, whilst Westminster manages defence, taxation and certain other matters.
In recent years, discussion has grown about whether Scotland's devolved system is delivering the outcomes people expect. Issues including education standards, health service performance, drug deaths and infrastructure provision have become subjects of political scrutiny and debate.
Kemi Badenoch is a senior Conservative politician who believes governments should be judged by their results rather than by how power is distributed. She has highlighted Scotland's experience as a significant example in a broader debate about whether devolution arrangements benefit the people they affect.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
The case for scrutiny rests on accountability and delivery. If Scotland is underperforming on education, health outcomes, ferries, and drug deaths compared to other UK regions, these are measurable failures affecting real people—not abstract ideological concerns. The principle that power should be distributed based on what produces results, whether at UK, Scottish, or local level, is fundamentally sound. After nearly two decades of SNP government, examining whether devolution as a structure genuinely enables better outcomes, rather than assuming it does so axiomatically, is a reasonable and necessary question.
The case against
Devolution fundamentally concerns democratic representation and self-governance, not merely economic metrics. Scotland chose this settlement democratically and has delivered distinctive policies reflecting its values—free prescriptions, tuition support, childcare provisions. Attributing all Scottish outcomes to devolution oversimplifies: funding, demographic change, UK-wide policy impacts, and specific government decisions all shape results, and raw comparisons across different systems obscure these complexities. Moreover, this critique appears strategically timed to undermine SNP support rather than genuinely questioning devolution itself.
Art Celebrity Culture Entertainment World
Read the full article at the source →
Originally published by Daily Mail as “GRAHAM GRANT: Kemi is right to question the competence of those governing in Holyrood … and kickstart a REAL debate on the need for devolution”.