Copyright scotsman
The Scottish Parliament was supposed to be a beacon of modern democracy. A place where ideas were tested rigorously, government was held to account, and legislation was scrutinised with care. Instead, Holyrood has become a theatre of failure. Scripted speeches, party-dominated committees, and rushed legislation dominate its chambers, leaving Scotland with weak scrutiny, shoddy laws, and a public that is increasingly disillusioned with its own legislature. The heart of the problem is the committee system. Committees were designed to be engines of independent scrutiny, where MSPs could rise above party lines and interrogate government proposals critically. In reality, ‘independence’ is a fiction. Party whips control votes, backbench voices are silenced, and committee chairs are chosen to serve party interests, not the public good. Ken Macintosh, former Presiding Officer, and Lord Jack McConnell, former First Minister, have repeatedly warned that committees are far too partisan. READ MORE: MSPs to consider almost 300 amendments to landmark assisted dying bill But partisanship is only half the story. Committees are chronically overworked and under-resourced. They are crushed under the weight of government legislation, with little time or capacity for independent initiatives. High turnover compounds the problem: between 2016 and 2018, 21 MSPs cycled through the nine-member Health and Social Care Committee alone. Across all committees, continuity, expertise, and institutional memory, the very foundations of effective scrutiny, are impossible to maintain. READ MORE: Scottish Parliament cannot be a proper forum for national debate until it stops being part-time The parliament’s original vision of deliberation and power-sharing is being strangled by a system that prioritises quantity over quality. Successive expansions of legislative competence have only made things worse. As Holyrood gains new powers, committees are forced into reaction mode, rubber-stamping government proposals rather than challenging them. Scotland deserves a parliament where committees are proactive, empowered, and independent. Right now, it is failing, badly. Want the latest Scottish headlines sent directly to your phone? Sign up to our new WhatsApp Channel here. The dysfunction is mirrored in the chamber. Speeches are strictly timed, four or six minutes, sometimes less. MSPs read pre-written scripts, leaving minimal room for genuine engagement or spontaneous interventions. Party whips control who speaks, ensuring debates are predictable, partisan, and rehearsed. Backbenchers are silenced and government MSPs often read pre-prepared answers, stripping scrutiny of any authenticity. The farce reached national attention when former First Minister Nicola Sturgeon read answers to questions that had not even been asked. This was not an accident, it was the inevitable consequence of a system built for party control, not democratic accountability. First Minister’s Questions, intended as the parliament’s flagship mechanism for holding government to account, has become symbolic theatre. Questions must be submitted days in advance, allowing ministers to prepare polished answers. Spontaneity is impossible. The public sees the result: staged performances, not serious scrutiny. And unlike Westminster MPs, MSPs lack full parliamentary privilege, meaning legal risk looms over honest scrutiny. Scotland’s Parliament, designed to be a modern exemplar of democracy, is institutionally hamstrung. The outcome is predictable: bad law. Legislation is rushed. Debates are shallow. Scrutiny is superficial. Holyrood, instead of being a forum for thoughtful deliberation, has become a vehicle for government priorities delivered on a tightly controlled, party-scripted timetable. Scotland deserves laws that are robust, well-crafted, and properly scrutinised. Currently, it is getting the opposite. Reform is urgent. Committees must be liberated from party control. Conveners should be elected by secret ballot of the entire chamber, not appointed by whips. Convenerships should carry ministerial-level pay to attract capable MSPs. Committees should be divided into Bill Committees, focused solely on scrutinising government legislation, and Subject Committees, empowered to consult stakeholders and produce committee-led bills. Anyone giving evidence on behalf of publicly funded bodies should declare financial relationships. No hidden influences. No party-controlled theatre. The chamber must be freed from rigid constraints. Speaking times should be extended to eight minutes, with additional time for interventions. Countdown clocks should provide real-time awareness. Backbenchers should apply directly to the Presiding Officer to speak rather than beg whips for a slot. Portfolio and topical questions should be submitted closer to debate, grouped efficiently, and granted time for meaningful follow-up. First Minister’s Questions must be unpredictable. And MSPs must have full parliamentary privilege to scrutinise government without fear of prosecution. Debates must be substantive. A Backbench Business Committee, using proportional representation, should ensure motions reflect the public interest and fall within devolved powers. The cross-party consensus requirement, which blocks urgent debates, must be abolished. Hyper-local trivia and off-topic discussions should not consume the chamber’s time. Scotland deserves debates that challenge ministers, scrutinise policy, and reflect the concerns of constituents. The public is losing faith. Scripted speeches, pre-prepared answers, and party control cannot be allowed to substitute for effective scrutiny and independent law-making. Without parliamentary reform, Holyrood will continue to produce rushed, poorly considered laws that lack public trust or legitimacy. The consequences are already visible. Poorly drafted legislation increases legal challenges, creates loopholes, and burdens local authorities and public services. Policies passed without proper scrutiny fail to deliver on promises, eroding confidence in government. Scotland cannot afford to wait while its parliament produces amateur theatre instead of good law. The crisis is structural, not temporary. It will not be fixed by minor tweaks or goodwill alone. Scotland needs a parliament that delivers on its founding promise: independent, robust, and credible law-making. Independent committees, liberated backbenchers, longer debates, full parliamentary privilege, and substantive, relevant scrutiny are not optional. They are essential. Scotland’s parliament is at a crossroads. It can continue down the current path, producing bad law, undermining public confidence, and hollowing out its democratic legitimacy. Or it can embrace bold, urgent reform, restoring committees, revitalising debate, and returning scrutiny to its rightful place at the heart of the legislative process. The choice is clear. Scotland deserves a parliament that legislates with thought, holds the government to account, and restores public confidence in democracy. The time to act is now. Holyrood cannot wait any longer. Stephen Kerr MSP and Councillor James Bundy are co-authors of ‘Is the Scottish Parliament Working’, a new essay published in the Scottish Public Affairs Journal, Edinburgh University Press.
