LABOUR are more focused on winning back English Brexiteers rather than pro-EU Scots and could already be conceding defeat in Scotland, according to Professor John Curtice.
The leading political scientist said there is an “implication” in Keir Starmer's “non-aggression” pact with the Liberal Democrats that the party admits it may not win back its historic Scottish strongholds.
The party has agreed an alliance with the LibDems to stop the Tories in English seats, reports the Financial Times.
READ MORE: Fresh pressure from Inverness politicians for Prince Andrew to lose Earl title
Prof Curtice (above) said the deal had been an “open secret for some time” but claimed it showed the party would be open to entering into a coalition with the Liberals in the event of a hung parliament in the next General Election.
The deal is “irrelevant” for Scottish seats because almost all are contested by a “Unionist party against the SNP”, he said – but said it could harm the possibility of a second independence referendum.
What concerns Scottish voters is in raising the possibility of a Lab-Lib coalition in Westminster in the event of a hung parliament next General Election, according to the political expert.
Labour are capable of getting the Tories out of power, said Prof Curtice, but might fall short of winning overall in the next poll.
The LibDems’ price for a coalition deal, he said, would likely be a strengthened pledge on electoral reform than the party secured in their 2010 coalition deal with the Tories.
Prof Curtice said proportional representation would make it harder for the SNP to push for indyref2 in the long run because the party is “overrepresented” at Westminster.
He told The National: “What is perhaps being acknowledged is there is quite a good chance Labour might not get an overall majority.
READ MORE: Tory attacks Nicola Sturgeon over SNP MSP's Sarah Smith tweets
“If Labour do have to do a deal, probably their first port of call will be the LibDems and not necessarily the SNP.
“You only have to look at what Starmer said on Radio Newcastle, they still are prioritising winning back Leave voters over winning back Remain voters in Scotland, that’s perfectly clear.”
Starmer was criticised earlier this week because he said there was “no case” for rejoining the European Union.
The deal would see Labour’s campaign “largely ignore” seats where the contest is between the LibDems and the Conservatives and vice versa. It would only apply in one Scottish Westminster seat, the paper reports, thought to be the Liberal stronghold of Orkney and Shetland.
Labour was helped back into power in 1997 in part because of tactical voting in Tory marginals – which also doubled the number of seats held by the LibDems.
The closeness between the two parties evidenced by the deal also harks back to the Lib-Lab coalition which formed the first Scottish Executive after devolution, according to Prof Curtice.
Starmer has previously ruled out making a deal with the SNP – or any other party – in the event of a hung parliament.
In 2021, he told the Daily Record: “You can’t vote for another party and get a Labour government in Westminster.
"That will be our strategic approach to those elections, and there’ll be no coalition going into those elections and no coalition coming out of it.”
Scottish Labour were approached for comment.
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