THe Burnham Bounce: Why New Prime Ministers Poll well

British politics has a habit of falling in love with new prime ministers. No matter how bruised the governing party has become or how exhausted voters appear, a change of leader often brings a wave of optimism. Approval ratings rise, newspaper headlines soften, and the promise of a fresh start briefly outweighs the memory of recent failures. Andy Burnham’s arrival in Downing Street is simply the latest example.

 

The numbers suggest Labour has received an immediate boost. Just ten days before Burnham became Prime Minister, Opinium placed Labour on 19%. By the end of July, support had climbed to 27%. Burnham’s own standing has improved just as quickly. His net approval rating has risen 17 points since the end of June. Almost half of Britons now believe he would make a better Prime Minister than Nigel Farage, while he also leads Kemi Badenoch comfortably in head-to-head comparisons. For a party that only weeks ago seemed trapped in a cycle of poor headlines and internal tensions, the turnaround has been dramatic.

 

It would be tempting to conclude that Burnham has already transformed Labour’s fortunes. Yet politics rarely offers such simple explanations. Labour’s rise has coincided with a difficult period for Reform UK, suggesting Burnham’s early success may owe as much to Nigel Farage’s problems as to his own leadership. Farage has long built his political appeal on presenting himself as an outsider taking on the Westminster establishment. But recent scrutiny surrounding the £5 million donation he received has complicated that image. A party that thrives on anti-establishment politics inevitably faces greater pressure when questions are raised about transparency and big-money influence. Since the controversy, Reform has slipped in the opinion polls, prompting suggestions that Farage’s carefully cultivated outsider persona is losing its appeal.

 

That makes Burnham’s position more complicated than the phrase “honeymoon period” suggests. Some of Labour’s recovery almost certainly reflects the goodwill that often accompanies a new prime minister. But some may equally represent voters turning away from Reform at precisely the moment Burnham entered Downing Street. If that is the case, Labour’s recovery is not simply the product of Burnham’s popularity, but also of his opponent’s decline.

 

Burnham’s first announcements have nevertheless reinforced the sense of a government trying to reset the agenda. His decision to remove VAT from electricity bills from October was presented as a way to “put more money in people’s pockets and bring back hope.” A day later came the promise to restore the £2 cap on single bus fares from January, which Burnham said would create “a country for everyone, everywhere” by making transport cheaper and communities better connected. These policies send a clear message that the new government intends to focus on easing the pressure on household finances. They are difficult to oppose and allow Burnham to establish an identity before more contentious decisions inevitably arrive.

 

History suggests this pattern is far from unusual. New leaders often benefit from a honeymoon effect, in which voters reward change before they have enough evidence to judge whether it has actually delivered results. As Prospect magazine notes, each new prime minister arrives in Downing Street with “at least some public goodwill”, generated not only by confidence in the incoming leader but by relief that a political chapter has come to an end. Recent prime ministers illustrate just how unpredictable these periods can be. Boris Johnson entered Number 10 with strong public support and maintained it through the Conservatives’ election victory. It was only the Partygate scandal that finally shattered his standing. Rishi Sunak inherited a Conservative Party already in steep decline and failed to generate any meaningful recovery in public opinion. Keir Starmer perhaps offers the clearest warning. He entered Downing Street with an approval rating of 39% in July 2024, only to see it collapse to an average net rating of -46% little more than a year later. The optimism surrounding a new leader proved extremely short-lived.

 

The media has played its part in reinforcing the shift. Before Starmer left office, headlines such as “Starmer faces revolt” and “Crisis at No 10” occupied the media. Within days of Burnham’s arrival, newspapers were instead writing about a “Burnham bounce” and “a fresh start for Labour.” Political narratives can change quickly. Whether Burnham’s recovery reflects genuine enthusiasm for his leadership or simply the convergence of favourable circumstances remains difficult to answer. Leadership undoubtedly matters, but so does timing. Taking office just as your principal rival loses momentum is an advantage few politicians would choose to waste.

 

Perhaps that is the real lesson of every prime ministerial honeymoon. Voters rarely fall in love with a detailed programme for government. They fall in love with possibility. Sometimes that possibility is created by a new leader. Sometimes it emerges because the alternative suddenly appears less convincing. Burnham has undoubtedly been given the benefit of the doubt. The challenge now is discovering how much of Labour’s revival belongs to him, and how much disappears if Reform succeeds in rebuilding the anti-establishment appeal that has fuelled Farage’s rise.