And now Labour may reset. Don’t get me wrong. Even if you harboured a residual sympathy for Labour in England, Burnham is no messiah. The reinvented Blairite/Brownite minister from the noughties isn’t nearly as radical as some would have you believe.
But in a sense, this is irrelevant. The Burnham effect has nothing to do with details like whether he believes in Rachel Reeves’s fiscal rules or not. It is about perception, and people perceive him as one of them. His open-necked everyman schtick works.
In fairness, it’s not all false. He is a local guy. He has decades of political leadership in the area under his belt. He does seem to instinctively speak in a language people can understand. He’s relatable in a way Starmer can only dream of.
READ MORE: Three-quarters of Scots say Brexit was wrong, new poll finds
More importantly, Burnham has managed to play the electorate both ways. He appeals to those still loyal to Labour no matter what – maybe a quarter of the electorate in an area like this – by reinforcing his pedigree and talking of party unity.
But he also presents as the champion of the disaffected, those who have all but given up on Keir Starmer’s party.
It’s a neat trick. Not dissimilar to the way in which the SNP used to present itself as both incumbent and insurgent in Scotland. And it’s why turnout went up in these provincial English towns last week.
But if people were inspired and motivated to turn out in Makerfield, the opposite was the case in Aberdeen where four out of10 people who voted in 2024 stayed at home. The First Minister says we need to learn lessons from Aberdeen South. Indeed, we do. I only hope they are the right ones.
Aberdeen South is to the SNP nothing like what Makerfield is to the Labour Party. Makerfield has been solid Labour for generations, whereas Aberdeen South has never been a stronghold for the SNP.
I remember Iain Sproat when I lived there in the eighties, and although today’s seat incorporates working-class areas of the old central constituency, overall, the area is conservative with a big and a small C.
The SNP have only ever won here when the Unionist opposition is split. And the savvy, motivated parts of the electorate are never going to let that happen in a by-election.
In many ways Aberdeen South, incorporating some of the most prosperous areas of Scotland, has little to benefit from Scotland’s independence. And its support is not required to win a majority in the country.
However, that neither excuses nor explains Richard Thomson’s loss last week. There are two reasons for that: industrial scale tactical voting, and SNP supporters staying at home.
It is claimed by some that the contest was a referendum on the future of the oil and gas industry. If so, that was a question 62% of the electorate seemingly didn’t care much about.
Was the SNP’s policy on oil and gas a significant factor in the result? Probably. If the party had a different policy, would it have won? Probably not.
Those now scrambling to push the party towards an aggressive pro-fossil fuel position are wrong. That is an argument the SNP can never win; you cannot out-Tory the Tories, nor out-Reform Reform.
READ MORE: King Charles’s publication of tax bill ‘will not restore public trust’
Besides which, it is a daft position. Anyone arguing that unconditional support for oil and gas corporations guarantees jobs might reflect on just how little investment they have made in a sustainable future in the north-east, and how much they have extracted in profit over the years.
Certainly, the SNP’s position needs firming up. Simply campaigning against taxing corporate profits without a policy to direct the industry to manage the transition to renewables is not enough.
Renewables are the future of our country, not just for domestic supply but also foreign export, and the SNP’s best future is to be their champion. The Tories and Reform UK can delude the public all they want that Rosebank and Jackdaw offer a new bonanza, but most rational people can understand, and the evidence confirms their claims are fallacies.
It is not possible to look both ways on this. You cannot want to accelerate the move away from fossil fuels and pose as a friend of the old industry at the same time. It won’t work; it’s bad politics.
And this is why the turnout in Aberdeen South was so abysmal. There were thousands of voters, convinced of the need for change, open to but maybe not convinced of the case for independence, but entirely unconvinced of the SNP alternative on both energy and the constitution.
The SNP need to put flesh on the bones of the mantra “Scotland’s energy in Scotland’s hands”.
How would control be exercised? How will jobs be guaranteed for those currently in the oil and gas sector? How will Scottish consumers get the benefit of lower bills? And how will the long-term energy security of our country be achieved?
Answer those questions and it will accelerate support for getting the power that comes with independence. Be silent and it will not.