Like turkeys voting for Christmas, the Scottish Greens voting to push Yousaf to step down as First Minister could be sealing their own fate in terms of influencing future Scottish Government policies.

Both Green ministers in government appeared to have good intentions but seemed rather naïve and attempting to run before they had learned to walk. The assessment of naïveté turned to apparent political cluelessness when Harvie and Slater seemed shocked on learning that Yousaf had decided to end the Bute House Agreement after Harvie and Slater had endorsed party members voting on its continuation, rather than insisting that their party stick with it until the end of the parliamentary term.

If Yousaf is compelled to come to an agreement with Ash Regan, do Green MSPs think that green policies will be advanced more than if they decide to abstain on a confidence motion? Should Yousaf step down as First Minister and be replaced by Kate Forbes do they think that green policies will be advanced more than if Yousaf continues as First Minister? If a Scottish election is now called do they think green policies will be advanced more under a new government than by continuing to work with, but outside, Yousaf’s government?

Scottish Green Party co-leaders Lorna Slater and Patrick Harvie speak to the media at Holyrood after Humza Yousaf pulled the plug on the Bute House agreement (Picture: Lesley Martin/PA Wire)

Perhaps once personal emotional reactions have subsided and Green MSPs come to terms with realpolitik common sense will prevail. If not, Scotland will probably be less likely to make the progress towards net zero that most Scottish Green Party members desire.

Stan Grodynski, Longnoddry, East Lothian

Bruised egos

One can appreciate the bruised egos of Patrick Harvie and Lorna Slater, but do they seriously think that the environmental cause, or independence, is advanced by supporting the Tory no confidence gimmick?

I enthusiastically gave the Greens my second vote in 2021, and supported the Bute House Agreement, but it is fair to say that the Greens left Humza Yousaf with little choice but to break the agreement after the Greens decided to put the agreement to their members, leaving another month of uncertainty. It could be argued that he did the Green leadership a favour by saving them from possible defeat.

Also, at the weekend the Green leadership refused to accept the medical advice evidenced in the Cass Report, which also damaged their credibility.

Thursday’s FMQs showed Holyrood at its infantile worst and almost makes one long for a return to first past the past which would have produced 62 SNP MSPs, five Tories, four Lib Dems, two Labour and no Greens or Alba in 2021.

The SNP remains the most progressive party at Holyrood as evidenced by its track record on tackling inequality, the cost of living, the environment and standing up for Scotland with he best performing NHS in the UK and an improving economy, but as things stand the Greens won’t be getting my second vote come 2026.

Fraser Grant, Edinburgh

Poetic justice

It is surely poetic justice that the continuity First Minister has used up so much political capital dealing with the many missteps, scandals and failings of his predecessor.

Equally, Humza Yousaf has developed a knack for taking a difficult position and making it even worse. The Bute House Agreement is merely the latest example, as it fell apart amid vitriol, blame and counter-blame.

Across the political spectrum, Scotland knows it is time for change. It is just a question of how long it takes those with the power to influence events to face up to reality.

Whenever that change comes our next Scottish Government will have a huge task on its hands. Many of the issues to be faced have been self-inflicted by those who have participated in the coalition of those who always knew best.

We must hope whoever comes next brings a little more pragmatism, common sense, and dare I dream, a little humility to the role.

Keith Howell, West Linton, Scottish Borders

Place your bets

Unlike Alex Salmond I don’t like a flutter but if I did my money would be on the Greens doing a U-turn.

Lewis Finnie, Edinburgh

Vultures circling

Scottish ornithologists are in for a treat over the next few days. A group of vultures is slowly circling above Holyrood. The air is not as hot as the African plains, but they smell blood and see a stricken beast.

Indeed, there is something almost Shakespearean about Holyrood right now, with a leader who reaches great heights who is then struck down by hubris bringing everything around him into the dust. Birnam Wood hasn’t moved, but Humza Yousaf is now reaping what he, his predecessor and his former pals, the Greens sowed. Is he to stagger on, doing the bidding of his defeated rival, Ash Regan and undo his prized (and much-loathed) Hate Crime Act, perhaps?

There are so many who have an axe to grind with his clueless administration, from parents terrified about their children being damaged by all-pervasive LGBT influence at school, to landlords, airbnb owners, lawyers about the ‘not proven’ verdict and juryless trials, estate owners in the Highlands, corner shop owners, farmers about muirburn, fishermen and oil workers about their jobs, islanders about ferries and everyone about heating their homes, not forgetting alcohol pricing. Normal taxpayers are greatly concerned and those on higher rates are leaving Scotland. Now Labour want a confidence vote in the SNP. About time.

Soon, vultures will feast on nationalists of various colours with knives sticking out of their fronts and their backs! The SNP experiment is over. It has damaged Scotland badly. It is time for a reset and an election.

Andrew HN Gray, Edinburgh

Time for change

The departure of Humza Yousaf as First Minister at some point in the near future could hopefully bring an end to the toxic Sturgeon era which initially promised so much and ultimately delivered so little.

The right successor could offer nationalists some hope that the recent divisive politics would be behind them and lead to a more united and realistic approach towards independence.

One would also hope that the promised forthcoming vote of no confidence would take into account the good of the country and not just the preservation of SNP jobs. Playing party politics would benefit no one and Scotland needs change.

Bob MacDougall, Kippen, Stirling

Lifting the veil

Why did Labour’s Shadow Chancellor Rachel Reeves MP use the word “we” when she said yesterday: “We will back the motion of no confidence in Humza Yousaf, but we’ve gone further and tabled a motion of no confidence in the whole Scottish government.”

She’s not an MSP. And the “Scottish Labour” Facebook and website pages claim it is the “Scottish Labour Party”. So is this Labour MP interfering in the actions of another political party? Or has she just given the game away, that Anas Sarwar is in fact merely a member of a branch of the London-registered UK Labour party? And that Anas Sarwar is just doing what Rachel Reeves and Sir Keir Starmer want?

E Campbell, Newton Mearns, East Renfrewshire

Difficult age

You report that the age at which a young person will be considered to be a child is to rise from 16 to 18 (26 April). If that is so, what happens to the intent to reduce the voting age to 16?

C Lowson, Fareham, Hants

Who benefits?

Alexander McKay made some very pertinent points in his letter about minimum unit pricing (25 April). However, it needs to be made clear that the only organisations to benefit from MUP are the supermarkets selling it. If the extra funds were clawed back and used to treat addiction then it would be a worthwhile exercise.

Margaret Fenton, Dalgety Bay, Fife

Seeds of dissent

I was disappointed with the article written by Katherine Hay on the Spruce Forest near Stobo (Scotsman, 25 April). This was little more than a glorified press release for the Stobo resident action group.

The basis of their argument is they want to “protect these areas”. However, the picture portrays a valley bereft of natural tree cover and of very low biodiversity value.

The new planting scheme includes significant areas of native woodland and integral open space. It will also produce valuable timber crops essential for construction as we attempt to de carbonise the building sector and meet climate change targets.

I suspect David Lintott and his like will be protesting against the felling of these same trees in 30 years’ time as it will spoil the habitat that is now attracting red squirrels and pine martens! Neither of which species will be found in the current deforested landscape.

Simon Hart, Edinburgh

Write to The Scotsman

We welcome your thoughts – NO letters submitted elsewhere, please. Write to [email protected] including name, address and phone number – we won't print full details. Keep letters under 300 words, with no attachments, and avoid 'Letters to the Editor/Readers’ Letters' or similar in your subject line – be specific. If referring to an article, include date, page number and heading.

Readers' letters: Greens should be careful what they wish for

Comments