For Liberal Democrat MP Layla Moran it must have seemed like she was back in the classroom, refereeing a heated argument between competing sides.

She tried the usual methods, adopting a calm voice, trying to inject a little levity into proceedings, but still it was not enough. The disputatious pair looked extremely cross with each other and in no mood to compromise.

Just another Sunday morning on the politics shows. What used to be havens for quiet-ish reflection on the week gone have now become an overflow area for the various squabbles going on at Westminster and Holyrood - and what a lot of them there are to go around. Yesterday’s two main bouts were Chris Packham v Luke Johnson on climate change, and Patrick Harvie v SNP critics of the Scottish Greens.

First to Packham and Johnson, one a TV presenter and campaigner, the other an entrepreneur and author, both panellists on the BBC’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg. The topic: “ordinary people” and climate change. Johnson said ordinary people would not vote to become poorer and colder, as he claimed they would be under a radical green agenda. What about the ordinary people in flooded Dubai last week, asked Packham? Or the ordinary people in the global south suffering record high temperatures?

Across television and radio, presenters competed to see who could best convey the mood of the past seven days. Kuenssberg said it had not been “the prettiest week” while The Sunday Show’s Martin Geissler described “another bruising week” for the Scottish Government and the Scottish Greens in particular.

The Sunday Show had secured Scottish Green of the moment Patrick Harvie as its main guest. He was in a reflective mood, seeming to speak more in sorrow than in anger at the Scottish Government binning its goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 75% by 2030. At times every minute of his 16 years in co-charge of the Greens seemed evident on his face.

Harvie is of course part of the Scottish Government and has been for more than two years. He has the job title and the wages to go with the position. Asked when he found out about the announcement he said it had been clear “for a long time now” that Scotland was not on track to meet the goal, adding that he had spoken about this at the party’s spring conference.

“Telling the truth about climate is absolutely critical and the truth is that while for a long time some people have been happy to describe Scotland as a world leader, or have self-congratulatory speeches about setting targets, we are not where we should be. We are years behind where we should be,” he said.

READ MORE Harvie hints at leadership exit

READ MORE  'A question of when, not if'

Subscribe here with our special Spring offer

All parties had to share the blame for not acting quickly enough, said Harvie, though some on his side will point to the Greens’ partner in government as the main culprit. How many will do so remains to be seen. Are they are angry enough to want out of he Bute House Agreement? That will be decided at a meeting of party members to take place in “late May”, he said.

That is a long time away given the general turbulence in politics at the moment. A general election in June or July is the latest talk of the Westminster steamie. Do the Scottish Greens want to be spending time and energy navel-gazing when other parties are getting ready for the election?

It is hardly as if either side, stay or go, needs a long time to gather evidence. From the shelved deposit return scheme to the scrapping of the Highly Protected Marine Areas plan, the Greens have more than enough information to decide if the partnership agreement is working for them.

Waiting till late May poses another problem. The SNP might decide they do not want to wait around to be dumped. They might do the dumping instead. The First Minister said at the weekend he “really valued” the agreement with the Scottish Greens, but it would be a popular move with some in his party to walk away from what they see as an ungrateful bunch. A tonic for the troops at what is a difficult time.

It would be a boost for the leader as well. He certainly needs one. As reported in the Herald on Sunday by political correspondent Kathleen Nutt, it is a question of “when not if” Humza Yousaf goes, such is the degree of disenchantment within the party at his performance since becoming leader.

What would Logan Roy do? That was one question that came to mind yesterday on seeing that glorious Herald on Sunday mock-up of SNP figures as the cast of Succession. A lot of fun must have been had deciding who would be who. Comparing the two pictures, Kate Forbes is in Shiv Royal’s place at the dinner table. Next to her is Stephen Flynn, Westminster leader. He’s in the chair occupied by Tom Wambsgans, the character who - spoiler alert - beat them all to the top job in the end. At the head of the table, in Logan Roy’s spot, is Humza Yousaf.

The comparison flatters the First Minister. As strategists go he often calls to mind not so much Logan Roy from Succession as a character from Sesame Street. He comes across as an innocent abroad in the world, one who inherited the Agreement, like so much else, from his predecessor and now doesn’t know what to do with it.

Assuming the late May date stays, Scottish voters should brace themselves for more weeks of argy-bargy between and among parties. Life as one long 24/7 Sunday politics programme.

I am reminded of Chris Packham’s reaction yesterday at the end of Laura Kuenssberg’s show. After a clip of shy, retiring former Health Secretary Matt Hancock blowing his own trumpet before the London Marathon, the camera cut back to the studio to find a groaning Packham had buried his head in his hands. Assume the same position Scotland, and we might just get through this.