The veteran political commentator had strong words for what 2026 might hold for the Prime Minister, Chancellor and country as a whole.

Political commentator Andrew Neil believes that Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves could snuff out any hopes for improvement for the UK economy in 2026. The veteran broadcaster wrote that the Prime Minister and Chancellor pose a risk to what could be a positive economic outlook for the UK, which, he explains, involves a growing global amount of oil and gas, which could bring energy prices down, and Chinese imports – such as electric vehicles, batteries and solar panels to machinery, steel and chemicals – which could also lower inflation.

But, he wrote in his Daily Mail column, that Starmer and Reeves could impact on any of the good news and green shoots of recovery.

He wrote: “The gravest risk to this rosy scenario is, of course, the dead hands of Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves – all the more dangerous when coupled with the congenital economic ignorance of today’s Labour Party.”

The veteran broadcaster believes that the pair are not equipped to deliver economic growth (Image: Getty)

He went on to describe the previous 12 months as “a miserable year for the economy under Labour’s enterprise-sapping tutelage.”

He added: “None of the good economic news set to grace our shores in 2026 has much to do with Starmer-Reeves. It will happen despite them – above all the rapidly growing global glut of oil and gas, which will exert substantial and welcome downward pressure on energy prices.”

Mr Neil says that Starmer and Reeves are wrong in their belief that economic growth can be helped along “by a bigger public sector, higher taxes, more public spending.”

His comments follow the revelation that Starmer and Reeves are officially the most unpopular people to hold their respective offices.

Luke Tryl, from the organisation More in Common, told the Financial Times: “There’s a real dislike, even loathing of Starmer and Reeves.”

“In focus groups, people say Starmer is a liar and only said what he thought he needed to say to get elected,” Tryl added.

“Reeves is often deemed to be uncaring. People say she’s targeting people who can’t fight back.”

The comments come after polling revealed the pair are the least popular holders of thier jobs (Image: Getty)

Growing hostility towards Labour’s leadership has opened up a wider argument about whether the problem lies with Starmer and Reeves themselves, or with a public that has become deeply disillusioned with politics more broadly.

Polling by Ipsos illustrates the scale of the challenge. In November, Starmer’s net approval rating fell to minus 66, the worst figure recorded for any prime minister since Ipsos began measuring public attitudes in the 1970s.

The number places him well below the lowest points reached by predecessors, including Tony Blair’s post-Iraq war rating of minus 44, Boris Johnson’s minus 46 during the Partygate scandal, and the minus 51 registered by Liz Truss after her short-lived premiership unravelled.

Reeves has fared little better. The same Ipsos data put her net approval rating at minus 60 in November — a record low for a chancellor — eclipsing even the unpopularity of George Osborne, during the austerity years.