Voting intention: 28th October 2026
See the full data tables here.
Labour maintains an eight-point lead over Reform UK in Opinium’s latest poll for the Observer, with little movement in voting intention this week. Andy Burnham also remains the most positively rated major party leader, while Kemi Badenoch moves back into positive territory.
However, the main story this week is the public’s reaction to Andy Burnham and Chancellor John Healey’s Autumn Budget. While views remain mixed, the Budget is the best received fiscal event in three years, with several of its household measures attracting substantial public support.
Labour maintains eight-point lead over Reform
Labour remains unchanged on 30%, eight points ahead of Reform UK on 22%. The Conservatives also remain steady on 20%, while the Liberal Democrats rise one point to 10% and the Greens fall two points to 8%.
🌹 Labour: 30% (n/c)
➡️ Reform UK: 22% (n/c)
🌳 Conservatives: 20% (n/c)
🔶 Liberal Democrats: 10% (+1)
🌍 Greens: 8% (-2)
Andy Burnham continues to record the strongest net approval rating at +7, up one point since last week. Kemi Badenoch improves three points to +2, while Ed Davey stands at -7.
Nigel Farage remains on -26, while Zack Polanski records the lowest rating of the party leaders tested at -32. Chancellor John Healey stands at -8 following his first Autumn Budget.
Burnham also maintains substantial Best Prime Minister leads, ahead of Badenoch by 20 points and Farage by 23 points.
Autumn Budget receives strongest public rating in three years
The public remain divided over the Autumn Budget, with 23% describing it as a good Budget compared with 29% who think it was bad. Nearly half (48%) are unsure.
This gives the Budget a net rating of -6, making it the best received fiscal event since Rishi Sunak and Jeremy Hunt’s 2023 Autumn Statement, which recorded -4.
It also represents a considerable improvement on more recent fiscal events, including the 2025 Autumn Budget (-33) and the 2026 Spring Forecast (-18).
Among those who welcomed the Budget, the most common reasons included support with energy bills and the cost of living, measures targeted at lower-income households, and the absence of major personal tax increases.
Those who viewed it negatively were more likely to argue that the support offered was insufficient, that the Budget failed to address longer-term economic challenges, or that some groups were being treated unfairly.
Household measures attract widespread support
The individual household measures announced by John Healey have generally received a positive response, with ten of the eleven policies tested receiving positive net ratings.
The most popular is extending the VAT cut on household electricity bills until July, supported by 77% and opposed by just 8%, giving a net score of +69.
Introducing a new tax-free allowance for lower-income pensioners also receives strong support (74%, net +65), alongside maintaining the £20,000 annual tax-free cash ISA allowance (72%, net +64).
Other popular measures include extending the 5p fuel duty cut (+63), removing household gas standing charges and shifting the costs to unit prices (+56), and providing £100 in energy bill support to eligible households (+50).
The only household measure to receive a negative net rating is increasing tax on savings income above the tax-free allowance by two percentage points from 2027, which 40% regard as a bad idea compared with 29% who think it is a good one.
Public expect lower-income households to benefit, but remain sceptical about growth
Voters are more likely to expect the Budget to benefit those on lower incomes than harm them, with 42% anticipating a positive impact compared with 19% expecting a negative one.
Expectations are also more positive than negative for retired people and those in work, although the public are less optimistic about the impact on their own finances. Some 24% expect to benefit personally, compared with 28% who anticipate a negative impact.
When asked about the Budget’s wider objectives, the government receives its strongest rating for protecting spending on things important to ordinary people (+11), followed by investing in the UK’s future (+5) and protecting working people from tax rises (+4).
However, voters remain sceptical that the measures will deliver Burnham’s ambition of “good growth in every postcode”. More than half (54%) think this is unlikely, compared with 24% who believe the Budget will achieve it.
Burnham most trusted on the economy, but confidence remains limited
Andy Burnham receives the strongest rating of the politicians tested on economic and financial matters, with 44% saying they trust him and 41% saying they do not, giving a net score of +3.
Kemi Badenoch follows on -7, narrowly ahead of Chancellor John Healey and Ed Davey, both on -8.
Nigel Farage (-33) and Zack Polanski (-36) receive the lowest ratings, with majorities saying they do not trust either politician on economic matters.
Although Burnham leads the field, the narrow margin between trust and distrust highlights the challenge facing the government in building greater public confidence in its economic management.
Commentary
Commenting on the findings, Priya Minhas, Political and Social Associate Director at Opinium, said:
“This isn’t a Budget the public are overwhelmingly enthusiastic about, but by recent standards it has landed relatively well. You have to go back three years to find a fiscal event that received a better rating.
“The individual household measures have also gone down well, particularly those aimed at easing pressure on energy bills and supporting lower-income pensioners. The challenge for the government will be sustaining that relatively positive initial reception and translating it into greater confidence among households about their finances and the wider economy.”
Opinium conducted a nationally and politically representative survey of 2,050 UK adults aged 18+ between 28th and 30th October 2026.
Methodological note: A scripting error affected some Budget policy questions, which have therefore been excluded from this article. Questions on the Budget’s expected impact, its wider objectives, economic growth and trust in politicians on economic matters were asked after the affected questions. These findings should be interpreted with appropriate caution, as earlier exposure to policy information may have influenced responses.