JOHN Curtice has given his verdict on what an Andy Burnham premiership might mean for Scottish Labour and the SNP.
The former mayor of Greater Manchester mayor and likely new prime minister has already rocked the boat with a speech on Monday in which he vowed there would be “new opportunities to extend devolution in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland”.
He also announced plans to set up a “Number 10 North” – an outpost of 10 Downing Street based in Manchester – and that its job will be to “make power flow into places like Glasgow, Aberdeen, Dundee, Paisley and Easterhouse”.
This had led to disquiet and fears it amounts to a Westminster power grab in some SNP circles, with figures including minister Ivan McKee saying Burnham “ doesn’t know what he means”.
But what does Burnham mean for Scottish Labour and the SNP?
Professor John Curtice told The National that it “is possible” that support for the Labour Party will rise in the wake of the “Burnham phenomenon”.
“We've only had 4 polls so far since Keir Starmer's resignation. Labour are up a couple of points. So, it’s a bit of a change in the weather but ot really a change in the climate,” the polling expert said.
“We know that quite a lot of the rise of the Labour vote in the last parliament came from the Tories. But there isn't that much of a Tory vote left to squeeze. Labour's vote may rise a bit, but you know – they are so low already.”
He added: “It's either 1906 or 1910 that was the last time Labour support in Scotland was as low as it was in the beginning of May. Maybe Labour can overtake Reform UK north of the border. But I'm not sure I'd be worrying too much if I were the SNP.”
Asked whether Burnham’s talk of further devolution could pose a problem for the SNP and the party’s messaging, Curtice was skeptical.
“He doesn't agree with independence and he thinks that power is too concentrated at Edinburgh, but again – here is one of the $64,000 questions about Burnham's speech yesterday,” he said.
“If the number 10 of the North really is what he says it is, it may well be the biggest accretion of ministerial power to be seen yet in the British constitution.”
