YouGov Poll Shows Public Backlash Against Rachel Reeves’ 2025 Budget Amid Economic Pessimism
When Rachel Jane Reeves unveiled the Autumn Budget 2025London on November 26, 2025, she expected a cautious welcome. What she got was a tidal wave of public distrust. Just two days later, YouGov plc released polling data showing 59% of Britons believe she’s doing a bad job as Chancellor — up from 55% after the Spring Statement in March. Only 11% think she’s doing well. That’s not just a dip. It’s a collapse in confidence.
Labour Voters Are Turning Away
The most alarming number? Among people who voted Labour in the July 2024 general election — the very base that put Reeves in power — 40% now rate her performance as ‘bad.’ Only 22% still give her a thumbs-up. That’s a 15-point swing in just eight months. It’s not just the opposition turning sour. It’s her own voters.
Here’s the thing: Labour won on a promise of stability, competence, and a return to fiscal responsibility after years of Conservative chaos. But now, with inflation still sticky, wage growth lagging, and public services strained, even Labour’s core supporters are asking: Is this really progress?
The Economy? Almost No One Thinks It’s Okay
Only 3% of all British adults say the UK economy is in a ‘good state.’ Three percent. That’s fewer than the number of people who believe in UFOs, according to some polls. Meanwhile, 67% expect things to get worse over the next 12 months. Just 7% think they’ll improve. The rest — 18% — are stuck in neutral, hoping for the best but bracing for the worst.
And when asked whether the Labour government is managing the economy well? Just 15% said yes. That’s lower than the approval rating for a politician caught on camera eating a sandwich with their hands.
Policy Popularity vs. Leadership Trust
Here’s the twist: people actually like the policies — just not the person delivering them.
- 75% support cutting environmental levies on gas and electricity to save households £150 a year
- 71% back raising the minimum wage for over-21s
- 67% approve of a ‘mansion tax’ on homes worth £2 million or more
- 64% want business rates lowered for shops, pubs, and hotels
These aren’t fringe ideas. They’re mainstream, popular, even popular among Conservatives. But they’re not enough to rescue Reeves’ image. Why? Because voters don’t believe she’s acting in their interest. They remember her earlier November move — summoning journalists to hint at income tax hikes — then pulling back at the last minute. To many, it looked like a political stunt. A feint. A distraction.
The IFS Backhanded Compliment
While YouGov measured public anger, the Institute for Fiscal Studies offered a dry, academic take. In its November 28 response, IFS researchers noted Reeves had raised taxes to create £22 billion in fiscal ‘headroom’ — calling it ‘a sensible move.’
But here’s the problem: ‘sensible’ doesn’t win elections. ‘Sensible’ doesn’t pay the bills. ‘Sensible’ doesn’t stop people from worrying about whether they can afford to heat their home this winter.
The IFS didn’t say the tax increases were fair. Didn’t say they’d boost growth. Didn’t say they’d restore public trust. Just that they created space. For what? Another round of austerity? A future tax cut? A bailout? The silence speaks volumes.
What’s Really at Stake?
This isn’t just about Rachel Reeves. It’s about the survival of the Starmer government’s credibility. Keir Starmer became Prime Minister on July 5, 2024, promising a new era of quiet competence. But now, less than 17 months in, his Chancellor is drowning in unpopularity — even as her policies are broadly supported.
The disconnect is terrifying for Labour: people want the policies, but they don’t trust the messenger. And in politics, trust is the only currency that matters.
Reeves’ team has spent months avoiding bold moves — no income tax rises, no major spending increases. Instead, they’ve tinkered. Adjusted. Dithered. And now, the public isn’t just unimpressed. They’re disillusioned.
What Comes Next?
No deadlines have been set. No emergency statements announced. But with the next major fiscal event — the Spring Statement 2026 — just four months away, pressure is mounting. Labour’s MPs are already whispering about reshuffles. Backbenchers are quietly demanding Reeves be given a clear mandate or replaced.
Meanwhile, the Conservatives are licking their wounds — but watching closely. They know the public mood is shifting. And if Labour can’t reverse this trend by next spring, the 2029 election could become a bloodbath.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why do people support the budget policies but hate Rachel Reeves?
Voters distinguish between policy and personality. The £150 energy bill cut, minimum wage hike, and mansion tax are seen as fair and targeted. But Reeves’ back-and-forth messaging — hinting at income tax rises, then pulling back — made her look indecisive. People don’t distrust the ideas; they distrust her judgment and communication.
How does this affect Labour’s chances in the next election?
It’s a major red flag. Labour’s 2024 win relied on loyal voters who believed in change. Now, 40% of those same voters disapprove of their Chancellor. If trust continues to erode, Labour risks losing its core base — especially in marginal constituencies where swing voters are already drifting toward the Conservatives or Reform UK.
What does the £22 billion fiscal headroom mean for ordinary people?
It’s a buffer — not a gift. The £22 billion doesn’t go directly to households. It’s money set aside to cover future deficits, potential recessions, or emergency spending. While it may prevent harsher cuts later, it also means current relief is being funded by tax increases, not economic growth. For now, it feels like borrowing from tomorrow to pay for today’s problems.
Why didn’t Rachel Reeves raise income tax if she needed the money?
She likely feared alienating middle-income voters — the very group Labour needs to hold onto. Raising income tax would have been politically explosive. Instead, she opted for less visible taxes: National Insurance tweaks, capital gains adjustments, and energy levy shifts. But voters noticed the absence of bold action — and interpreted it as weakness.
Is there any historical precedent for this kind of backlash?
Yes. Gordon Brown’s 2008 pre-election budget saw similar spikes in public distrust despite technically sound fiscal policy. Voters didn’t feel the pain of tax increases — they felt the absence of hope. Reeves is walking the same tightrope: delivering responsible numbers but failing to inspire confidence. History suggests that’s often enough to lose power.
What should Rachel Reeves do next?
She needs to stop talking about budgets and start talking about people. A national tour explaining how the £150 energy cut helps a single parent in Manchester, or how the mansion tax funds new school nurses in Cardiff — with real stories, real faces — could rebuild trust. Numbers win debates. Human connection wins elections.
