THE big news in Scottish politics today is, of course, the collapse of the Bute House Agreement between the SNP and the Scottish Greens.
First Minister Humza Yousaf took the decision to walk away from the deal following days of increasingly fevered speculation about its future – despite strongly backing it just yesterday.
The decision came against the background of the Scottish Greens' EGM due to be held next month, which had been forced by members unhappy about the dropping of the Scottish Government's target of a 75% reduction in carbon emissions by 2030, and by the Scottish Government welcoming the suspension on prescriptions of puberty blockers for under-18s.
The issue has generated considerable controversy in recent days which has only been worsened by Green co-leader Patrick Harvie's trenchant criticism of the review.
Subscribe to The National for just £20 for an entire year
There has long been disquiet amongst sections of the SNP about the Bute House Agreement, which was established by Nicola Sturgeon following the 2021 Scottish elections as a means of ensuring a majority pro-independence government which would be able to pass the legislation necessary for a second independence referendum.
As we now know, the UK Supreme Court ruled that the Scottish Parliament does not have the legal competence to pass legislation for another independence referendum, and the Westminster parties will continue to refuse consent irrespective of the views of the people of Scotland.
It is to the immense and lasting shame of the media in Scotland that it has allowed this abortion of democracy to pass without even a fraction of the outrage which it has manufactured over delays to the construction of some ferries.
However, with the ending of the Bute House Agreement the Scottish media now has a new stick with which to beat the Scottish Government.
The decision to end the agreement will be welcomed by some in the SNP and the Scottish Government. Many party members point to the series of controversies concerning policies which have been promoted by the Scottish Greens and which have mired the Scottish Government in negative publicity. From Highly Protected Marine Areas to the deposit return scheme.
With the Scottish Greens' EGM some four weeks away, the Scottish Government faced a month of feverish press speculation about the future of the Bute House Agreement and pressure to accede to the demands of those Green members.
The conclusion has clearly been reached that the political benefits to continuing the Bute House Agreement are outweighed by its political costs.
The unceasing stream of controversy which the SNP alliance with the Greens is generating, particularly since the Greens themselves might terminate the agreement, may have been a far worse political crisis for the Scottish Government to navigate, leaving it looking as though it was hostage to events.
READ MORE: Will Humza Yousaf have to resign as First Minister if he loses no-confidence vote?
Humza Yousaf has taken the decision that it is far better to jump than to be pushed – particularly since he can now avoid weeks of damaging publicity about the future of the agreement.
He will also be able to placate the influential voices in his own party who have long expressed disquiet about the SNP's deal with the Scottish Greens. Not all of these are on the right of the SNP, and most of them have not spoken in public about their misgivings, knowing full well that if they did so the Scottish media would go to town on the “divisions” within the SNP.
The Greens are furious about being unceremoniously dumped, but they do share some blame for their predicament. It is a political reality that the Bute House was a product of a set of circumstances which no longer hold true. The agreement has served its purpose and the truth is it is now doing both parties more harm than good.
The SNP will now govern as a minority administration, negotiating with the other parties on a case-by-case basis in order to get legislation passed.
Scenting blood, the Scottish Tories are predictably calling for a vote of no confidence in the First Minister, while Anas Sarwar is demanding an early Scottish parliamentary election.
That's not going to happen, and while the Tory motion of no confidence can no longer be brushed off as ineffectual mischief making as it was in the past, it is by no means a certainty that Humza Yousaf will be brought down by it.
He only has to secure the vote of a single MSP in order to produce a tied vote, in which case the Presiding Officer is obliged to vote for the status quo and the First Minister will survive.
With the LibDems, Greens, Tories, and Labour all backing the no-confidence vote, that single MSP is Ash Regan.
This piece is an extract from today’s REAL Scottish Politics newsletter, which is emailed out at 7pm every weekday with a round-up of the day's top stories and exclusive analysis from the Wee Ginger Dug.
To receive our full newsletter including this analysis straight to your email inbox, click HERE and click the "+" sign-up symbol for the REAL Scottish Politics
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel