Yousaf must fix the bridges he burned with the Scottish Greens urgently
◆ Those in the SNP who would argue ‘we don’t need the Greens’ miss the point of the Scottish Parliament entirely, writes Stewart Mcdonald
Ihave a long and storied list of disagreements with the Scottish Green party, starting with their somewhat kumbaya approach to defence and international security, and their proposals to replace Scotland’s defence sector with a “peace industry” of think tanks and educational institutes first among them. I nonetheless supported their entry into government and backed the Bute House Agreement from the day of its signing right up to its unglamorous termination on Thursday. I did so because, in the greatest tradition of the SNP, I believe in big tent, broad coalition politics.
There are, of course, limits to how big the tent can be. I do not labour under the delusion that Douglas Ross will be winging missives my way any time soon. But just take a look at the shifting sands upon which our political world is set: in the last 20 years, Scottish voters have seen agreements between Labour and the Liberal Democrats, the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats, the Conservatives and the DUP, and the SNP and Scottish Green Party.
In Scotland, in 2015, former Labour voters in Glasgow South, seeing a better future in the SNP, elected me as their MP. Something similar happened in 2019 to Alyn Smith in Stirling – only his constituency was formerly held by a Conservative MP. Meanwhile, in North East Fife, SNP MP Stephen Gethins lost his seat to the Liberal Democrats.
The idea that there are genuinely insurmountable philosophical or ideological barriers between the mainstream parties of Scottish politics would be alien to those voters – in Glasgow South, in Stirling, in North East Fife and across the country – who have given their vote to these different parties and who have seen, in the past 20 years, almost every constellation of coalition possible. Broad and sometimes unexpected coalitions are not only possible: the modern Scottish Parliament was founded on the idea that such agreements are desirable. They iron out kooky ideas from one constituency or party and allow, in the spirit of Scotland’s unicameral representative parliament, policy to be made for all the country.
Those in the SNP who would argue that “we don’t need the Greens” forget their history. They miss the point of Holyrood entirely. For years, we in the SNP have railed against the “elected dictatorship” of the Westminster model, where one party wins and holds all the cards for the duration of its term – governing without ever conceding. Every person and institution in Scotland has seen firsthand the damage that this approach to politics can do to a country. The only viable and sustainable way forward is through consensus, coalition-building and a concerted effort to take the country – all the country – with us.
With that in mind, I cannot hide my disappointment at the way the Bute House Agreement was terminated. I recognise the many valid reasons for calling time on the formal coalition with the Greens. But it was always inevitable that, not long after sending Patrick Harvie and Lorna Slater out to Charlotte Square to wait for their bus home, the First Minister would need their votes for something. It is doubly unfortunate that such a need has come so soon. As any politician knows, the first rule of politics is learn how to count.
The First Minister must, as a matter of urgency, seek to mend the bridge he burned this week. I don’t mean by welcoming them back into government – that ship has sailed – but by meeting with the Green co-leaders privately to make amends and discuss how they might cooperate in the future. There is too much at stake for both parties, not to mention the country at large, to throw away this partnership overnight, and I rather suspect similar overtures to other parties will be met with outright hostility.
But our colleagues in the Green party must also use this time for some serious reflection. Their first foray into government has been defined by their stubborn refusal to listen to outside voices and an unwillingness to engage in the slow and unglamorous work of delivering on the priorities of people across Scotland, preferring instead to expend their limited political capital on high-profile, ideologically driven, flagship policies. The threats facing our country, society and planet, from the climate emergency to economic headwinds, are systemic. They require a whole-of-government response with every minister pulling in the same direction and bold policies with broad societal and political backing. The Greens did not even come close to delivering this.
Whilst it is true that the Bute House Agreement had become a media distraction and then a political distraction, I remain convinced that the reset the government needed was one based on policy, delivery and political tone. That was as true for the Scottish Greens as it was for my own party, and I’ve written many thousands of words in these pages about what that might look like.
But for my own party, we must continue to be true to the aspiration that is written into our name, and always seek to be a truly national party that can build coalitions from the centre ground of Scottish politics. We must be a party of Glasgow’s Southside as well as rural Stirling. We do that by aligning our priorities with the voters: better public services, economic growth and delivering societal fairness and resilience. Only by giving voters a sense that they have an SNP government focused on them, can we ever hope to move the dial on independence.
There’s no doubt the First Minister has taken a huge gamble this week – one that is as personal as it is political. And although it’s often said that fortune favours the bold, in politics it first favours those who can count. I hope there’s an abacus in Bute House, because I suspect it’s about to be used more than once.
I remain convinced that the reset the government needed was one based on policy, delivery and political tone