My party is in trouble if it allows extremists to dictate its leader

Humza Yousaf, shortly before sacking his Green ministers and terminating the discredited Bute House Agreement (BHA), claimed the partnership was ‘worth its weight in gold’.

Most people could see that the BHA was disastrous, leading to a series of dud, damaging policies which cost the taxpayer and the people dearly. If it was anything, it was fools’ gold.

The overwhelming majority of the public agree and can see that this was the root of many of Humza’s problems. SNP members too, in a recent opinion poll, believed that the deal should be ended.

But even now, John Swinney and his many supporters amongst my MSP and MP colleagues still appear to believe that this was not a problem.

When a political party is so out of step with public opinion, it is in real trouble.

Nationalist MSP Fergus Ewing has warned that people are appalled the Greens – a ‘fringe party of extremists’ – should still wield power over the SNP leadership debate

But Kate Forbes does not subscribe to fallacious orthodoxies. She may be young, but she is not as muddle-headed as her elders.

Take the trans rights debate: a large majority of MSPs voted for the law that 16-year-olds can change gender at will.

But the public did not agree. Opinion polls found two-thirds of people opposed self-ID without the current checks designed to protect youngsters who may change gender then regret it later.

Kate sees the urgent need to reset our politics to provide fresh hope and to focus on competent government; the pressing need to spend our time in government working with business to build economic success and prosperity over a period of ten years, not just a short term fix. In doing so, we are better able to fund public services.

What has not been mentioned much in this leadership debate is another serious problem facing the party.

While the BHA is formally over, its consequences will, unless there is a fundamental change in direction, continue to damage the country for years to come.

For example, the Heat in Buildings Bill will impose legal obligations on homeowners over energy efficiency standards and installation of decarbonised heating.

What happens if either or both cannot be afforded, and cannot in practice be achieved without inordinate cost?

The homes involved will become unmortgageable. Lenders won’t lend on homes which breach the law.

As well as causing mayhem and misery to thousands of hard-working Scots who can’t sell their homes, this will, in the view of senior banking and property experts I have worked with, lead to Scotland being reassessed as a mortgage market by lenders.

They may then set higher interest rates here than in the rest of the UK as our houses will be seen as of higher risk, and the chances of default will also increase.

It is extraordinary that the top civil servants have apparently not warned ministers of these risks. I worked as a solicitor in property for 20 years. These consequences are foreseeable and inevitable.

A raft of legislation for rural Scotland on deer management, land reform and other matters will also cause further conflict, tension and political trouble.

I would lay good money on some of this legislation being in breach of the European Convention on Human Rights legislation too.

This government has lost court action after court action.

When I was a minister serving under John Swinney it was made totally clear to me that we must not lose judicial reviews, because it would damage the reputation of the Scottish Government.

He was right then. It looks as though he is wrong now.

I faced about five main judicial reviews. We did not lose one. I beat Donald Trump and the RSPB. I’m still not sure which victory gave me the most pleasure.

The ban on wood stoves for new builds is now in place – but experts cannot interpret the rules nor understand their impact.

Ironically, in Sweden if one has a home with a heat pump, powered of course by electricity, it is mandatory to have a wood stove for outages. In Sweden it is illegal not to have one.

Here in Scotland, it will be illegal for new homes to install one. Aren’t the Swedes leading the way in green policies?

So, even though Humza has delivered a belated farewell to his Green ministerial duo, their influence lingers on and will do so for the rest of this Holyrood term until 2026, should we get that far.

The green tail has been allowed to wag the dog for too long.

Last week, it was docked. But this week, it has re-emerged as a kind of phantom limb.

I mention these things because if John Swinney is to unite parliament, as all his supporters claim he is certain to do, will we not be left with a de facto BHA in force?

A kind of Scottish Green Frankenstein? Or will he get down to the serious business of hard work with the other main parties to amend or scrap all these daft, damaging policies – which may be illegal, certainly impractical, and usually unaffordable?

We just don’t know. But thus far, he remains in thrall to the Green experiment. Indeed, Green MSP Ross Greer was so struck by working with John he apparently called him ‘my work daddy’.

While the Greens may be out of government, do they still have an effective veto on the choice of the next First Minister?

If the reason we must choose ‘Honest John’ is because the Greens will support him, and that we must not support Kate Forbes because the Greens don’t based on her religious beliefs, have we handed them the pen to undersign their preferred candidate as leader of the country?

That point is one that many are already making to me. Folk do not like it at all.

They are right. People are appalled a fringe party of extremists should continue to wield such power and influence, albeit because the SNP leadership choose to yield it to them.

Read more