In his latest column, Stephen Daisley argues that Holyrood has had enough time to prove the case for devolution and has fallen short. His central point is that, if devolved government is to remain in place, more authority should be passed to local councils rather than concentrated further in Edinburgh.
The article presents devolution as a system with serious built-in weaknesses rather than a model that simply needs minor reform. Daisley says the current constitutional setup continues not because it is working well, but because there is little political courage in Westminster to admit that the settlement is not delivering as intended.
He is also critical of calls for more devolution. From the snippet provided, Daisley suggests that politicians shaped by the devolved era are naturally inclined to expand it, while opponents see the system as one that has not improved the quality of government and may even reward weaker political leadership.
Overall, the piece reframes the Scotland devolution debate around where power should sit inside the country. Instead of sending additional responsibilities to Holyrood, Daisley argues that local authorities would be the better home for decision-making, bringing power closer to communities and away from another central layer of government.
