A GENERAL Election presents a double disadvantage to whoever is leading the Scottish Government.

Not only do they face criticism – justified or otherwise – over Scotland’s performance in a raft of devolved policy areas, but they have to grit their teeth and play along with the idea that voters’ dissatisfaction in those areas should, logically, guide how they choose their next MP.

Pointing out “this is a Westminster election, and health/education/housing is a devolved issue” is a triply bad look, as it can be interpreted as a tacit admission of failings, an attempt to deflect from them and an insult to the intelligence of any voter raising them at the “wrong” time. Quite the bind.

Of course, Scottish Government ministers can try to advance arguments about, say, the impact of creeping privatisation in England on health funding in Scotland, or apples-and-oranges comparisons of educational performance north and south of the Border, or a lack of borrowing powers limiting their ability to build social housing. The problem, as demonstrated over six long weeks, is all of that takes a bit of explaining, and it also sounds very defensive.

READ MORE: John Swinney deserves chance to turn things around for 2026

What hope is there of getting these nuanced messages across when all your opponent has to do is shout “CHANGE!” at every opportunity? It’s little wonder the SNP’s messages didn’t inspire former supporters to come out and vote this time around.

It’s not that Scots don’t care about issues like immigration, defence, oil field licences, or what’s left of the UK’s benefits safety net – but the majority will prioritise their own immediate needs, especially amid a cost of living crisis.

It’s hardly surprising that they were more open to hearing promises to “fix the UK economy” and “cut their energy bills” than detailed explanations of a) why those promises are not backed up by convincing plans and b) why Scotland should, at some unspecified later date and after an unspecified political process, have full powers over its own economy.

The campaign for 2026 begins now, and you’d better believe the issues of health, education and housing will still be at the forefront of voters’ minds. It’s one thing to try to make a General Election all about independence – which John Swinney definitely didn’t do – but ahead of a Holyrood election the public will rightly want answers to their questions about devolved policy areas.

They can’t be expected to set aside their wait for a GP appointment or cancer treatment, disruption in the classrooms of their children’s school, or the pricing out of huge swathes of Scots not just from home ownership but from renting too. But Anas Sarwar can’t simply repeat the formula Keir Starmer used to win last week. He’ll need serious policy proposals, and an explanation of how he would pay for them.

The challenge, then, for the SNP will be to set out what has been achieved, what more can be done after May 2026, and what more would be possible with the full powers of independence. It will be to press Labour on how they would fund their alternative proposals. And it will be to convince disillusioned voters that solid evidence is informing their policy positions.

Last week the Scottish Government published its response to the Cass Review of gender identity services for children and young people. Depending on who you ask, it either released this immediately after the General Election “purdah” period, in line with its previous commitment to do so at the earliest opportunity, or snuck it out last Friday while everyone was distracted by the election results, to avoid scrutiny.

The timing made a good story for political journalists, especially those keen to blame the SNP’s perceived obsession with gender issues on their drubbing in the election, but it distracted from the key issue of the contents. The report’s introduction highlighted the fact that “significant public, media and political interest … may detract from the primary issue of providing the best clinical care”.

And so it proved. The news that Scotland is to follow Hilary Cass’s recommendations and ensure care in this area is holistic, person-centred and evidence-based was relegated by the Scottish Daily Express to paragraph nine.

The SNP have learned the hard way that you can’t please all of the people all of the time and that a policy demanded by one section of their own membership may totally alienate another. We’ve reached a strange and disturbing place when an evidence-based policy relating to child healthcare, of all things, is seen as controversial.

Policy-making should not be dictated by how one noisy activist sub-group or another is likely to respond – it should involve a rational examination of the evidence (considering both intended and unintended consequences), a decision on the best approach, then robust defence of the reasoning, including why alternative options were rejected. Soundbites won’t cut it – the Scottish public demand and deserve better than that.

Let’s show the UK what a grown-up election campaign looks like.