North east debate: where does the region fit in the 2026 Holyrood election?

Prosper, in partnership with the University of Aberdeen, brought together senior voices from across Scotland’s political spectrum for a hustings in the university’s Elphinstone Hall.

Appearing before an audience of 120 and chaired by broadcaster Davy Shanks, the panel featured Gillian Martin (SNP), Liam Kerr (Scottish Conservatives), Matthew Lee (Scottish Labour), Maggie Chapman (Scottish Greens), Michael Turvey (Scottish Liberal Democrats) and James Wyllie (Reform UK).

All the candidates agreed that energy is the top priority for the region.

Aberdeen’s reputation as the energy capital of Europe, alongside the ongoing price shock caused by the recent outbreak of conflict in the Gulf, made it inevitable that the transition from fossil fuels to renewables took centre stage.

But in a Holyrood election campaign, there is a limit to what candidates and parties can promise voters, as the Scottish Parliament’s devolved responsibilities over energy are limited.

Michael Turvey argued that the UK and Scottish governments need to work more closely together on energy policy. Gillian Martin, the SNP government’s energy secretary, agreed and pointed to close working with Ed Miliband and Michael Shanks, her counterparts in the Labour government at Westminster.

However, what Scottish politicians say on energy projects still matters. The devolved government at Holyrood can provide support, or indicate opposition, to projects in the North Sea. There are clear differences between the parties on how to handle the energy transition

While all the candidates wanted to focus on energy, they sharply disagreed on how to manage the transition.

Gillian Martin emphasised building out ScotWind — the leasing process run by Crown Estate Scotland — to continue the expansion of offshore wind.

Liam Kerr gave his support for renewables alongside the approval of new oil and gas fields, but questioned how electricity generated by renewable sources in north east Scotland could be exported to the rest of the country.

Maggie Chapman emphasised community ownership of energy and ensuring the benefits of new developments are spread fairly across society.

Michael Turvey called for a long‑term industrial strategy for the energy sector and accepted the need for new nuclear power generation.

Matthew Lee argued that oil and gas workers need greater support to retrain for opportunities in renewables.

James Wyllie demanded that all renewable subsidies should be ended, net zero targets scrapped, and suggested reintroducing open‑cast coal mining in Scotland.

Prosper’s policy research has shown that Scotland has a once‑in‑a‑generation opportunity arising from the energy transition. In this election, voters have a real choice about how to grasp it.

The performance of public services is a key electoral battleground

Away from energy, the audience of Prosper members and staff, students and alumni from the University of Aberdeen focused on funding for key public services.

SNP plans for walk‑in GP centres were defended by Gillian Martin, who argued that they will end the ‘8am rush’ for doctor’s appointments. However, the opposition parties criticised this policy, citing evidence from GPs themselves and concerns about workforce shortages.

NHS Grampian’s precarious financial position was a major concern for both the panel and the audience. While there was agreement that the north east’s health service, and the local authorities responsible for social care, are at a relative disadvantage in per‑head funding compared to the rest of Scotland, none of the candidates clarified whether extra spending in the region would require cuts to other services.

Ongoing industrial action at the University of Aberdeen prompted discussion about the financial sustainability of Scotland’s higher education sector. Beyond a commitment to take the findings of the ongoing review into university funding seriously, however, none of the candidates proposed specific reforms to how higher education should be funded.

There was a degree of consensus on the need for reform and efficiencies in the public sector, but James Wyllie’s suggestion that £6bn could be saved by scrapping many public bodies was condemned by the other parties as unrealistic.

When asked about taxation, most speakers were reluctant to commit to increases. Only Maggie Chapman expressed support for policies that would increase government revenues, while also stressing the need for wealth redistribution. The tension between protecting household finances and sustaining public services ran through the evening.