IPSOS POLL: Burnham bounce continues with public more favourable towards PM than other leading UK politicians

 In the light of the upcoming by-election in our neighbouring borough of Camden I thought readers might be interested in this latest iPSOS Poll that took plce between the 21st and 27th of August,

IPSOS PRESS RELEASE
  • Favourability towards the PM has improved this month. 4 in 10 are now favourable towards Andy Burnham (+8 from July), compared to 27% for Kemi Badenoch, 26% Nigel Farage, 23% Ed Davey and 19% Zack Polanski.
  • Public prefer a Burnham led Labour government to a Farage led Reform one (50% to 29%). Burnham is seen as more in touch with ordinary people and more understanding of the problems facing Britain than Nigel Farage.
  • Whilst a majority of the public are unfavourable towards Nigel Farage, Reform UK are still seen as the main alternative to Labour. Getting immigration under control is seen as the main benefit of a Reform government.

London, UK. New polling data from Ipsos in the UK, conducted 21–27 August 2026 explores attitudes towards leading politicians and parties in the run up to Reform UK party conference. Polling was conducted before Zack Polanski announced he was standing in the Holborn and St Pancras by-election.

Favourability ratings

  • 40% are favourable towards Andy Burnham (+8pts from July), 27% unfavourable (-4). Favourability ratings for other leading politicians are similar to last month.
  • Favourability towards the Labour Party has also improved this month. 30% are favourable (+5pts) and 40% unfavourable (-7pts).

Image

  • Ahead of Reform Party conference, the public are more than twice as likely to be unfavourable towards Nigel Farage (54%) as favourable (26%). Ratings for the party itself are closely aligned – with 27% favourable and 52% unfavourable.
  • With Zack Polanksi announcing his intention to stand in the upcoming Holborn and St Pancras by-election, it is noted that 19% are favourable towards Mr Polanski and 25% towards the Green Party generally. This compares to 40% and 30% for Mr Burnham and the Labour Party respectively. In London 40% are favourable towards Burnham and 28% Polanski whilst 38% are favourable towards Labour and 36% the Greens.

Image

 

Burnham vs Farage

When presented with a binary choice, the public prefer an Andy Burnham led Labour government to a Farage led Reform government by a margin of 50% to 29%.

Image

The public were given a list of 15-character traits and asked which ones were most important for making a good Prime Minister. The top 5 were picked by 6 in 10 or more:

  • Understanding the problems facing Britain (68%),
  • Has the right plans for Britain (65%),
  • In touch with ordinary people (62%),
  • An honest person (61%)
  • Gets the big decisions right 60%)

The public were then asked whether these traits did or did not apply to various party leaders. Notably, Andy Burnham leads Nigel Farage significantly on being in touch with ordinary people (52% to 32%), being honest (41% to 20%) and understanding the problems facing Britain (51% to 39%).

Image

Who do the public see as the main opposition?

Kemi Badenoch’s position related to Nigel Farage has improved over time. She is now as likely to be seen as a future PM than Farage. This month 36% say it is likely she will be PM in the future, 47% say it is unlikely. Meanwhile, 38% say it is likely Farage will be PM and 47% say unlikely. This is in sharp contrast to last September when 63% said it was unlikely Badenoch will be PM and the public were more likely to think Nigel Farage was likely than unlikely by a 14-point margin (48% to 34%).

Image

With that said, when asked which party are the main opposition to Labour, meaning the most likely alternative government 37% still say Reform UK and 27% say the Conservatives. Although the gap has narrowed significantly from last September where Reform led by 22 points.

Benefits / drawbacks of a Reform government

When asked what the main benefits would be from a hypothetical Reform UK government the top 4 were that they would get immigration under control (33%), they represent traditional British values (22%), they represent real change for the country (20%) and they are in touch with what real people think (20%).

The main perceived negatives are ‘they would make the country more divided’ (44%), Nigel Farage would make a bad PM (40%), and they are too close with President Trump (39%).

Direction of the country

Whilst 59% think the country is heading in the wrong direction and just 17% say right direction, the proportion saying wrong direction has fallen 5 points since June and is significantly lower than the 71% recorded at the end of last year.

Commenting on the findings, Keiran Pedley, Research Director for UK politics at Ipsos, said:

As the Reform conference gets into full swing, it is clear that Andy Burnham becoming Prime Minister has changed the political landscape. He is better liked than other leading UK politicians and seen as more in touch with ordinary people than Nigel Farage. At the same time, Farage himself faces a challenge in that Kemi Badenoch’s poll ratings have improved over time and she is now seen as likely as Farage to be Prime Minister one day.

That said, it would be foolish to write off Reform UK just yet. They are still seen as the principle opposition to Labour for now and lead on the most important issue facing the country – immigration. Which all suggests they are not going away. Whether they are heading for government, on the other hand, is another matter.

  • For the full findings, please visit the Ipsos website.
  • Ipsos interviewed a representative sample of 2,277 online British adults aged 18+. Polling was conducted online between 21–27 August 2026.
  • Data are weighted to match the profile of the population. All polls are subject to a wide range of potential sources of error.

 

Thursday, 3 September 2026

Union advises Londoners not to use driverless taxis until DfT, TfL and platform companies come clean on status of "human safety drivers"

 From the ADCU

Are “human safety drivers” qualified and safe to support AV rollout? ADCU demands urgent answers as driverless taxis hit London streets
The App Drivers' and Couriers' Union (ADCU) is calling for urgent answers from the platform companies, the Department for Transport and Transport for London after driverless cars for hire appeared on the streets of London for the first time today.
ADCU has repeatedly raised serious concerns about the rollout of autonomous passenger vehicles, including in evidence to the London Assembly Transport Committee in June. A central unanswered question remains the status of the so-called "human safety drivers" inside the vehicles during the pilot.
ADCU is demanding immediate clarity on:
  • Who these human safety drivers are and how they have been recruited.
  • Whether they are licensed private hire drivers.
  • If they are licensed drivers, where liability sits if there is an accident or a passenger becomes unwell.
  • If they are not licensed drivers, what qualifications and authority they have to act in that role.
Cristina-Georgiana Ioanitescu, General Secretary of ADCU, said:
Londoners are being asked to trust a system without being given basic answers about who is responsible when something goes wrong. We have been asking these questions for months. If there is a collision, if a passenger becomes ill, or if a safety-critical decision has to be made, the public has a right to know exactly where liability sits and what status these so-called human safety drivers actually have."
TfL requires licensed private hire drivers to pass stringent checks before they are allowed to carry passengers, including medical, safeguarding and regulatory requirements designed to protect the public. So the obvious question is: has that same standard been applied here? If the person sitting in the vehicle is meant to intervene in a safety-critical situation, or deal with a passenger emergency, Londoners need to know whether they have gone through the same licensing and vetting process as every other private hire driver in this city. If not, why not?”
The platform companies, the Department for Transport and TfL need to answer these questions today. Until they do, we would not advise anyone to set foot in a driverless taxi.
ADCU has consistently argued that autonomous vehicle trials must not be allowed to proceed without full transparency, proper democratic oversight, and clear safeguards for passengers, workers and the wider public.

Robotaxi plans for London 'premature' say GMB warning of 'unprecedented levels of social and economic disruption' if transition plans not in place

 
Responding to reports that Uber will add driverless options for its customers in London, David McMullen, GMB Senior Organiser, said:
 

With hundreds of thousands of people employed to drive every day, we need to be really careful with the roll out of driverless cars unless we are prepared to see unprecedented levels of social and economic disruption.
 

GMB has called on TfL and the Government to urgently take responsibility for developing a plan that protects drivers and holds operators accountable for the disruption that these services will ultimately cause.
 

Until a plan is put in place to manage this transition and support drivers, it is premature to move to 'driverless' services.
 

It’s vital that we consider the implications of this before it’s too late.