2026 Scottish manifesto analysis: Scottish Liberal Democrats

*Note: This article was updated on 22 April 2026 to reflect the fact that the originally released manifesto had no publicly available costings. This analysis was carried out on the basis of the original release, and as per our policy in manifesto analysis, we only rely on figures that are directly available to the public.

Alex Cole-Hamilton’s Scottish Liberal Democrats announced their manifesto for the Scottish Parliament election at the end of last week. We’ll go through the main announcements on tax, spending and public sector reform, and we’ll look at whether the level of detail matches what we would expect from a manifesto.

Tax: aspirations rather than commitments

The Liberal Democrats offer limited proposals for tax reform, with the somewhat more realistic pledge to “prioritise getting Scotland’s finances in shape so we can cut taxes in the future”. Their tax policies are mostly conditional on “where funds are available”. It is refreshing to see some recognition of the current tight fiscal environment in relation to tax policy which has been lacking in other manifestos.

On income tax, the Liberal Democrats aim to lift tax thresholds in line with inflation and begin closing the tax differential with England, conditional on ensuring public service funding is protected. Both objectives are well-directed. Uprating thresholds with inflation would provide meaningful relief for Scottish taxpayers whose earnings have grown while thresholds have remained frozen. Closing the higher rate threshold gap would also reduce the significant jump in marginal rates faced by Scottish taxpayers earning between £43,663 and £50,270. However, the manifesto provides no detail on the cost of these changes, what specific reforms would be made, or what fiscal conditions would need to be met before they could be delivered. As presented, this is a statement of intent rather than a policy.

On non-domestic rates, the Liberal Democrats propose to work towards incorporating a land value element into the business rates system. They aim to remove disincentives for businesses to improve their properties, reduce incentives to leave land vacant, and level the playing field between high street retailers and online competitors using large warehouses in cheaper locations. These are genuine merits worth acknowledging. But the manifesto provides no detail on how this would work in practice, what revenue it would raise, or over what timescale it could be expected to be delivered. This is a long-term aspiration rather than a parliament-length commitment.

Similarly, on council tax the Liberal Democrats provide a big picture reform proposal with little details. They propose to initiate cross-party discussions on reforming council tax and are in favour of a similar land value tax with more regular property revaluations closer to the current business rates cycle of every three years. It is positive to see mention of council tax, which needs reform, but the absence of any firm commitment or implementation detail raises questions about how likely reform is to materialise.

Public spending

Health and social care

The manifesto has a detailed health section with some specific commitments, though funding was largely unaddressed in the published version when it was released.

The most concrete workforce commitment is the proposal to embed 900 new multidisciplinary patient-facing staff in GP practices – naming specific types of staff including nurses, physiotherapists, pharmacists, dieticians and mental health professionals. This level of specificity is welcome and gives the commitment more credibility than the vague headcount targets seen elsewhere. However, the cost implications were not addressed in the original publicly available version, and the manifesto does not clarify whether this would be funded from within existing health budgets or require additional spending.

On mental health, the Liberal Democrats commit to year-on-year real terms increases to the mental health budget, new walk-in services, and integration of mental health professionals alongside police and prison staff. These are meaningful directional commitments that would help address waiting time pressures. However, the original public version of the manifesto does not outline how much funding would increase by, making it hard to measure how deliverable these changes to mental health services would be.

On social care, the Liberal Democrats propose to introduce national bargaining on pay and conditions for care workers. Social care workers have been a chronically underpaid workforce and improving wages would be a meaningful step for both workers and recruitment. However, this proposal carries significant and unquantified fiscal implications in the original public version of the manifesto. Collective bargaining has historically driven higher pay settlements in Scotland than elsewhere in the UK and has been a contributing factor to public sector pay deals outstripping budgeted pay policy since 2022. This is not an argument against better pay for care workers, but the cost implications need to be acknowledged and addressed rather than left unspecified.

Education

Education has been a key focus of the Liberal Democrats’ manifesto, with a number or proposals put forward.

The commitment to recruit 2,000 additional pupil support assistants as part of a new School Workforce Strategy, and to end the use of short-term and zero hours contracts for teachers, addresses two well-documented problems in Scottish schools. Delivering these through permanent positions rather than temporary appointments would provide genuine improvements in both classroom support and teacher job security. However, the cost implications were not addressed in the original public version of the manifesto. The proposal to make Professional Additional Registration free and available to teachers on temporary contracts – qualifying them to teach additional subjects – is an interesting and relatively low-cost proposal, which may help in delivering this work force strategy by moving an oversupply of teachers to where there is greater need.

The proposal to introduce play-based learning until the age of seven is similar in direction to the Greens’ proposal, but with an important distinction – the Liberal Democrats propose to deliver this within the school setting rather than through an extended childcare entitlement. This avoids the significant additional cost of funding two extra years of childcare provision that would be implied by the Greens’ approach.

On colleges, the Liberal Democrats propose to “restore colleges to a powerful role in local economic development” by aligning courses with the new skills strategy focused on the skills businesses need. They also plan to secure funding for colleges by giving them greater freedom to retain surpluses and borrow money. This would give colleges more financial flexibility, which is significant given the real terms fall in funding in recent years, but it would also leave colleges more exposed to financial risk. This could be a risk for the government if they are reliant on colleges to deliver the skills for their economic growth and innovation.

On universities, the manifesto acknowledges the current funding issue, but it proposes only a cross-party consensus process rather than a firm commitment to increase government funding.

Welfare and childcare

The Liberal Democrats’ welfare offer is more modest than most other parties, which in the context of Scotland’s tight fiscal position is not necessarily a criticism.

On childcare, the proposal to shift the 1,140 funded hours to start on a child’s third birthday – rather than the term after the third birthday, which can mean a wait of up to five months – is a concrete reform. It is more modest than the expansions proposed by other parties, but it addresses a genuine frustration for families. It is worth noting this would apply only to working families, which limits its reach in addressing child poverty among households where parents are not in employment.

The Liberal Democrats propose to increase support for unpaid carers, committing to ensure carers are “at least £1,000 per year better off than they would be under the old system of Carer’s Allowance.” It is worth flagging that Carer’s Allowance was replaced by the Carer Support Payment in 2025, so this comparison is to a system that no longer exists. The manifesto does not state what the payment would increase to, making it impossible to compare with the current provision. The proposal to introduce an earnings taper to remove the current cliff-edge is a well-targeted technical improvement. Carers who are able to increase their working hours would no longer face an all-or-nothing loss of support, which could meaningfully improve work incentives and financial security.

Housing

The Liberal Democrats commit to building 25,000 homes per year, which would suggest 125,000 additional homes by the end of the parliament. The manifesto does not identify additional funding to achieve this, implying delivery would need to come within existing capital budgets. The SNP failed to meet their previous housebuilding target within a comparable spending envelope, which raises the question whether the planning reforms proposed will be enough to bridge the gap between current delivery levels and this target.

The proposal to deliver 10,000 homes dedicated to key workers, with local eligibility determined by councils, is a targeted and practical intervention. If they focus the policy on areas where housing costs are a barrier to filling public service vacancies and price homes at a level that genuinely incentivises mobility, this could make a meaningful difference to local public service capacity.

Energy and transport

On energy, the Liberal Democrats are committed to delivering net-zero by 2045, and providing a “clear, detailed and stable roadmap to net zero”, though the manifesto does not state what this roadmap would contain.

The proposal to transfer ScotWind rental income to nearby councils is an interesting distributional approach that would allow communities hosting renewable energy infrastructure to benefit more directly from it. However, the manifesto does not address what happens to councils with equally tight budgets but without nearby renewable assets. This policy would also remove ScotWind revenues as a source of central government fiscal flexibility, which carries the same risk flagged in relation to other parties’ proposals to ringfence or distribute these revenues.

The commitment to quadruple solar energy generation over the parliament is ambitious. The original published version of the manifesto did not address additional funding for this expansion, and it is worth noting that significantly increased solar generation would require corresponding improvements to grid infrastructure to transmit the additional power – a capital investment the manifesto does not acknowledge.

On transport, the Liberal Democrats propose to legislate for a rolling 30-year ferry infrastructure strategy with statutory duties to replace vessels is a substantive structural reform addressing a well-documented failure. This goes further than other parties in commitment to island connectivity, but the original published version of the manifesto did not address the funding required to maintain and replace an ageing fleet, which would represent a significant ongoing capital commitment.

Public sector reform

Similar to other parties the Liberal Democrats manifesto pledges to review the “cluttered quango landscape”. However, a notable difference is they frame this as a review, rather than a specific reduction target as in other party’s manifestos.  The Liberal Democrats also propose to half Scottish Government and agency spend on private consultancy. This is a more concrete target for efficiency savings, but the manifesto gives no details on where they aim to focus this reduction or the scale of savings they hope to achieve.

The commitment to give councils multi-year funding deals and greater local taxation powers is one of the more substantive local government proposals of any party. Multi-year funding certainty would allow councils to plan more effectively and reduce the short-termism that annual budget cycles encourage. The manifesto does not, however, address the implications of different local authorities taking different approaches to local taxation – a risk of increased overall tax burden in some areas, and potential incentives for households and businesses to locate in lower-tax authorities.

Overall level of detail

This is one of the longer manifestos (although some way off the Scottish Greens), but not in terms of policy proposals. Commitments are generally modest, which is not meant as a slight. One of the main pledges in the economy section is to “[p]rioritise getting Scotland’s finances in shape so we can cut taxes in the future.” Recognition of the challenging outlook faced by whoever forms the Scottish Government is something we haven’t really seen in any of the other manifestos.

Proposals on tax do have some more detail than we have seen in some cases, even if many of the commitments are to review current arrangements. LBTT is a clear example of that, as is the commitment to explore how to grow the income tax take. On business rates, there is more engagement with some of the particular issues faced by some types of establishments and the fact that the methodology for valuation and the role of the assessors needs rethinking. The manifesto doesn’t have answers for all these, but that is something that the party itself is upfront about; committing to review areas and initial proposals for areas to focus on is already more than we have come to expect, and it’s certainly a step in the right direction.

Proposals on health and social care are less fleshed out. The Liberal Democrats identify a set of issues such as GP access, ‘dental deserts’ and too little focus on preventative care. Social care is also identified as needing to be fixed. But identifying problems and working out solutions are very different matters; “[t]ake pressure off the NHS by promoting preventative health” and “[f]ix social care” are some way off being the latter.

In fact, the level of engagement with the overarching message is lower on pretty much all the areas of public spending in the manifesto than in the public finances and tax side of things. The pledges at the top of each chapter are quite vague, followed by lots of detail in a shopping-list-like manner – perhaps not surprising for a party that might expect to be in the conversation about holding the balance of power when passing the coming Budgets if there is no overall majority.

 

This work is supported by the Nuffield Foundation. The Nuffield Foundation is an independent charitable trust with a mission to advance social well-being. It funds and undertakes rigorous research, encourages innovation and supports the use of sound evidence to inform social and economic policy, and improve people’s lives. The Nuffield Foundation is the founder and co-funder of the Nuffield Council on Bioethics, the Ada Lovelace Institute and the Nuffield Family Justice Observatory. Find out more at: nuffieldfoundation.org.

The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Foundation.