The SNP have once again emerged as the largest party at Holyrood albeit with fewer seats than in the previous term. Beyond this much will be written about the plight of other parties and the rise of Reform UK. But what does all this mean for the functioning of Parliament and our public services?
The new Scottish Government may appear very familiar, with the same party having formed the government since 2007, but it will have to operate within a very unfamiliar Scottish Parliament. The new Parliament will have 64 new MSP’s (out of a total of 129), albeit many have had experience in local government and some have had experience in Westminster. For some parties, such as Reform UK, this may pose particular challenges as a relatively new party which now has 17 MSPs, as well as many seats in local government in England and in the Senedd in Wales. But all those new to Holyrood will quickly have to acquaint themselves with the corridors, committees and constitutional complexities of the Scottish Parliament. This will require a shift in mindset from electioneering to governing and holding government to account, as well as a shift in horizon from the weeks of campaigning to the years of consulting, policy making, and scrutinising.
The decisions that are taken over the next five years will shape many decades to come. In doing so it will be important for all members of the new parliament to consider the impact of those decisions on all constituents across all of Scotland and even the future generations to come. A helpful reference point here will be Scotland’s National Performance Framework. This was first developed in 2007 as part of a series of reforms which I previously described as creating a form of strategic state. Alongside the National Performance Framework (NPF) this originally included a restructured Scottish Government with cross-cutting directorates replacing siloed departments and a significant investment in leadership development. This ambitious agenda for change was supported with the findings of the influential Christie Commission report which set out the four pillars of People, Prevention, Performance and Partnership, that continue to be a key reference point today.
Since then I have observed that a loss of focus and leadership, aligned with cuts to leadership development activity, contributed to weakened performance. But the most recent review of the NPF, which was completed before the end of the last parliamentary term, has regained some of the original focus and provides a strong starting point for the new government to work on a strategic, long-term and outcomes-based basis – and for the new Parliament to hold them to account for their conduct and performance.
The new National Performance Framework has the vision to “improve the wellbeing of people living in Scotland now and in the future”. This vision is underpinned by six national outcomes: connected, healthy, secure, prosperous, skilled and sustainable. Work must now begin to develop a range of measures to assess progress towards these national outcomes but even more crucial will be defining the ways of working that will underpin a culture of strategic, long-term planning and decision-making. Realising that new collaborative culture across the public sector will be difficult in the context of planned cuts and increasingly polarised politics. But equally, having a long-term, future generations perspective on the business of government and parliament will be even more important as the new Parliament faces significant fiscal challenges and a stagnant economy.
Many of these challenges are recognised in Scotland’s Public Service Reform Strategy which sets out three pillars of reform: prevention, joined up services, and efficient services (and also directly references the Christie Commission report). Part of this plan for reform includes a reduction in public bodies, integration of public services, and a reduction in the annualised Scottish Government and public body corporate costs of £1bn over the next 5 years. Reaching agreement on the means to achieve these ambitious goals will require significant negotiation and cooperation with public bodies, trade unions and across parliament. But implementing any subsequent reforms will also require considerable commitment, nous, and skill by leaders across the public sector.
All of this will require the Scottish Government to build consensus across the parliament, with the wider public sector, and with the public. In doing so there will be a need for listening, for public engagement, and for the use of relevant and up-to-date evidence. The argument for public service reform has been well rehearsed, but will the new Parliament be up to the challenge?
