THE Bute House Agreement was “terminated” by First Minister Humza Yousaf on Thursday morning, who said the power-sharing deal between the SNP and the Scottish Greens had come to its “natural conclusion”.
It came after days of uncertainty over the future of the agreement.
Scottish Greens members were set to vote on whether or not to stay in government after expressing anger over puberty blockers for under-18s being "paused" in the wake of the Cass Review, and the Scottish Government dropping some of its climate targets this week.
That vote is no longer necessary, as Yousaf (below) confirmed that the deal was over “with immediate effect”.
Since then a furious Scottish Green group have confirmed that they plan to back a vote of no confidence in Humza Yousaf.
We’ve been speaking to members across both parties to get their reaction to the news.
Whilst there's been a mixed response, it's clear that members from both parties feel angry with how their respective party leadership has dealt with the situation.
Are SNP members happy that the Bute House Agreement is over? Are the Greens angry that they didn't get to vote after all? And what does this mean for the future of independence?
Here’s what some members had to say.
“I'm one of the people who started the process of pushing for an EGM to vote on the future of the BHA. I was until three days ago, one of the co-conveners of the Rainbow Greens.
“The fact that Humza Yousaf has chosen to end the agreement with what seems little to no consultation of his members, or even his own Cabinet, shows that he has no interest in party democracy. Many SNP members have been calling for their own vote, and many senior SNP figures have continued to support the agreement.
“This is political cowardice.”
Ryan Donachie, Scottish Greens
“I’m very concerned that our leaders, who were happy to dance to the SNP’s tune for three years, are now trying to salvage what is left of their credibility by hitting hard at Humza Yousaf.
"Where was this criticism when Patrick, Ross and Lorna were around the government table?”
Anonymous, Scottish Greens
“Scottish Greens prides itself in internal democracy. We are not a party who makes decisions on a whim after pressing the panic button like Humza Yousaf did.
"He pushed us before we jumped. There can be no other conclusion. It’s clear, that if Scotland wants a country where progressive change is enacted, they must vote for our Scottish Greens candidates both in the upcoming election, and in 2026.”
Anonymous, Scottish Greens
“I'm the convener of SNP Peterhead. I'm glad it's over. I had high hopes for the BHA but if most SNP members are honest we voted for it to get a majority for an indyref bill.
“Now that avenue is closed, and with the performance of the Green Ministers in government it's hurting us.
"I'm a grassroots activist and the question I'm getting most on the doors is: ‘Why are you still in this deal with the Greens?’
"It's the thing we have to defend most and ultimately it could cost us votes.
“I hope we can still work constructively with them, and I wish them well. But as soon as the Referendum Bill was scuppered in the UK Courts the BHA had outlived its usefulness.”
David Birkett, SNP
“We welcome the end of the BHA. It's been clear for some time that this agreement had reached its end and was harming the SNP and independence in areas like Aberdeen.
"The agreement was signed before we were hit with the cost of living crisis and dealing with that must now be the focus of government.”
Alan Petrie, co-convenor of Aberdeen Independence Movement, SNP
“SNP member here – absolutely hate this with a vengeance. Humza campaigned for the leadership further to the left than he ever needed to, and his strong defence of the BHA was what sold me on his vision for the Scotland (I left the party in January 21 over transphobia and rejoined after he was elected leader).
READ MORE: What it was like for a National journalist at the end of the Bute House Agreement
“The progressives in the SNP have been hung out to dry in favour of courting reactionary conservative rebels that want to take away my rights as an LGBT+ person and see an independent Scotland as an Irish-style tax haven for corporations.
“I will only vote SNP and vote for independence for as long as I genuinely feel that an independent Scotland is a springboard for the socio-economic change I want to see happen and have no faith in the Westminster system to deliver.
“My faith in that has been severely shattered but today’s decision, which leaves me questioning whether the ‘left’ have a place in the SNP anymore.”
Jack Boag, SNP
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