Can Shona Robison Keep the SNP Competitive Despite Scotland's Budget Deficit? Budget Day Today

13th January 2026

As Scotland approaches the May Holyrood election, the Scottish National Party faces one of its most serious governing challenges in nearly two decades in power: a growing budget deficit.

With limited fiscal flexibility and rising demands on public services, Finance Secretary Shona Robison must balance economic reality with political survival.

Whether the SNP can remain competitive will depend less on eliminating the deficit — which is unlikely in the short term — and more on how convincingly Robison manages, explains, and politically frames the situation.

The Scottish budget is constrained by structural factors largely outside Holyrood's control. While the Scottish Government has some devolved tax powers, it remains heavily dependent on the UK Government’s block grant and bound by the fiscal framework agreed with Westminster.

Rising public-sector costs, demographic pressures, and weaker-than-expected revenue growth have created a persistent funding gap, estimated by independent analysts to be around £1 billion and potentially growing.

Robison has already been forced to introduce emergency savings and tighter spending controls to ensure the budget balances, a legal requirement for devolved government.

Against this backdrop, the SNP’s electoral challenge is not simply technical but political. Voters are less likely to judge the government on abstract deficit figures than on lived experience: NHS waiting times, the cost of living, public transport, and household bills.

One of Robison’s key strategies, therefore, is to focus spending decisions on highly visible and politically salient priorities. By emphasising increased NHS funding, measures to tackle child poverty, and cost-of-living support, the SNP can argue that it is protecting the most vulnerable and prioritising frontline services, even in difficult financial circumstances.

Tax policy will also play a central role. The SNP has positioned itself as willing to use progressive taxation, but broad tax rises carry political risks, particularly among middle-income earners. Robison’s more likely approach is targeted adjustment: correcting tax thresholds, offering limited reliefs, and avoiding dramatic changes that could alienate key voter groups. This allows the SNP to maintain its social-democratic credentials while minimising electoral backlash.

Equally important is narrative control. The SNP has consistently argued that Scotland’s financial difficulties are shaped by UK-wide economic decisions, including austerity legacies and UK tax and spending choices.

By framing the budget deficit as a consequence of structural constraints imposed by Westminster, Robison can shift responsibility away from Holyrood while reinforcing the SNP’s broader constitutional argument that Scotland would be better served with greater fiscal autonomy. While independence itself may not dominate the election campaign, the theme of limited powers remains central to SNP messaging.

Robison has also sought to project competence and stability by ensuring the budget passes with minimal parliamentary drama. Securing tacit or explicit cooperation from opposition parties, particularly Labour, helps the SNP present itself as a responsible governing party rather than one mired in deadlock.

In an election context, this reinforces the image of the SNP as the default party of government, capable of navigating complex challenges even without a majority.

However, risks remain significant. Local government pressures, council tax rises, and service cuts could undermine the SNP’s claims of protection and progress.

Opposition parties are already framing the deficit as evidence of long-term SNP mismanagement rather than external constraint. After nearly 20 years in power, the argument that Westminster is solely to blame may resonate less strongly with voters who increasingly expect accountability from Holyrood itself.

Ultimately, Shona Robison’s task is not to eliminate the budget deficit before the election, but to persuade voters that the SNP is managing it fairly, competently, and in line with public priorities.

If she can convince the electorate that difficult choices are being made responsibly — and that the alternative would be worse — the SNP can remain competitive in May. Failure to do so risks reinforcing a growing perception that the party has run out of answers after too long in office.