SCOTTISH Greens co-leader Patrick Harvie has said that he "honestly" does not know the future of the Bute House Agreement and that it is the “most important decision” his party has ever had to make.
Speaking on BBC Scotland’s Sunday Show with Martin Geissler, Harvie urged Scottish Greens members to listen to each other’s frustrations and focus on action in the coming weeks.
It comes as the party's co-leaders face internal anger from members over the Scottish Government's ditching of climate targets and the pausing of puberty blocker prescriptions for young trans people.
When asked about what he thinks the future of the Bute House Agreement will be, Harvie said: “Honestly, I don’t know – the first thing that I hope is that every party member engages with us, that we listen to each other’s perspectives and to think very deeply about the most important decision that we’ve ever made.”
He added: “My instinct is that we will achieve far more by staying in government.
READ MORE: Humza Yousaf reacts as Greens to vote on Bute House Agreement
“But I don’t want our members to think grudgingly, on balance that we’ll probably do more good by staying.
“I want them to feel enthusiastic and reassured that not only the Greens and the Scottish Government, but Scotland is on the right track here, and we clearly have more to do to persuade them.”
When asked whether Harvie (below) understood the anger felt by many Scottish Greens members, he replied: “I do and I share it.”
He continued: “I share the anger about the situation that Scotland is in, that we are years behind where we should be.
“This is a critical moment for the future of climate policy and Scotland, which is the reason Greens are in politics in the first place.
READ MORE: Scottish Greens and SNP members react to vote on Bute House Agreement
“It’s critical to the future of our party as well. Over the next few weeks, we have probably the most important decision to make that we’ve ever had to make about the future of our party.
“I want to make sure that we’re all listening to each other over those few weeks and making sure that we genuinely understand and share not just the sense of urgency and the deep disappointment and anger about the fact that Scotland is not on track at the moment, but a focus on determination and action.”
Harvie added that he was concerned that if the Scottish Greens walked away from government, the likes of SNP backbencher Fergus Ewing – who Harvie argued is “constantly popping up and having a go at environmental policy and urging the Government to slow down” – would have more weight in decisions.
Whilst no date has been set for an emergency meeting, Harvie said he expects it to take place towards the end of May.
The Cass Report
The internal revolt over the future of the Scottish Greens in government does not stem entirely from the rolling back of climate targets.
Many members – particularly from the LGBT branch of the party – expressed anger that the Sandyford gender clinic in Glasgow had agreed to pause the prescription of puberty blockers to under-18s following the findings of the Cass Report.
READ MORE: Yes supporters gather in Glasgow for major independence march and rally
Harvie stressed that the decision was not made by the Scottish Government, but by “individual clinicians”.
When asked whether Harvie accepted the Cass Report as a valid scientific document, he replied: “I’ve seen far too many criticisms of it to be able to say that.”
Harvie added that a ministerial statement will take place next week outlining the Scottish Government’s position on the findings of the Cass Report.
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