Rachel Reeves and Angela Rayner could both lose their seats, the poll suggests (Image: PA)

Ed Miliband is also vulnerable (Image: Getty)

Reform would unseat 12 cabinet ministers, the Greens three and an independent one. Among the high-profile Labour losers are eight senior figures who won their seats in the July 2024 general election: Chancellor Rachel Reeves (Leeds West and Pudsey), Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper (Pontefract, Castleford and Knottingley), Energy Secretary Ed Miliband (Doncaster North) and Defence Secretary John Healey (Rawmarsh and Conisbrough), all defeated by Reform; Chief Secretary to the Treasury Darren Jones (Bristol North West), Business Secretary Peter Kyle (Hove and Portslade) and Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn (Leeds South), defeated by the Greens; and Health Secretary Wes Streeting (Ilford North), losing to an independent. Former deputy prime minister Angela Rayner (Ashton-under-Lyne) is also projected to lose to Reform.

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer would hold Holborn and St Pancras comfortably, though with a significantly reduced majority, reports The Sunday Times. Deputy Prime Minister David Lammy clings on in Tottenham by just 1 %.

Tory leader Kemi Badenoch could also be at risk (Image: Getty)

Luke Tryl of More in Common said Reform remains “well over 200 seats clear of their closest challenger and the only party that could viably form a government”, despite a slight plateau since January (down 57 seats). Labour gains 16 seats on the earlier poll but still faces a historic collapse from 411 in 2024.

The Green surge marks the biggest change, threatening Labour in its London strongholds and among younger voters. Possible leadership contenders such as Mr Streeting and Angela Rayner are among those projected to fall, leaving few obvious successors to Sir Keir.

With Reform on 324 seats, it is the clear frontrunner but short of the 326 needed for outright control.

The survey leaves Sir Keir’s government under siege from both Reform nationally and the Greens on the left, especially in the capital.

Labour Left With Just 102 MPs in Bombshell Poll – Reeves, Rayner and Miliband Gone

A dramatic polling projection that once suggested Labour could be reduced to just 102 MPs sent shockwaves through Westminster, with a string of senior figures including Rachel Reeves, Angela Rayner and Ed Miliband among those projected to lose their seats.

The figure of 102, however, comes from an earlier More in Common MRP conducted in 2026. The organisation’s much more recent September projection paints a significantly different picture, with Labour now projected to win 250 seats if a general election were held under the assumptions of that model. The contrast between the two surveys illustrates just how rapidly Britain’s political landscape has been changing.

The earlier projection was nevertheless remarkable. Labour had won 411 seats at the 2024 general election, but the MRP suggested the party could fall to just 102. Reform UK was projected to surge to 324 seats, just two short of an overall majority, while the Conservatives were placed on 81 and the Liberal Democrats on 62.

The projected losses included several of Labour’s most recognisable politicians. Rachel Reeves, then Chancellor, was among the senior figures considered vulnerable. Angela Rayner was also projected to lose her constituency, as were Ed Miliband and a number of other prominent Labour cabinet figures.

Such a result would have represented an extraordinary transformation of the House of Commons. It would not simply have meant Labour losing office. It would have represented a collapse in parliamentary representation on a scale rarely seen in modern British politics.

From 102 seats to 250

The most important development since that dramatic projection is that Labour’s position has subsequently improved considerably.

More in Common’s September 2026 MRP projected Labour to win 250 seats, making it the largest party in a hung parliament. Reform UK was projected to take 147 seats, the Conservatives 125 and the Liberal Democrats 63.

That does not mean Labour would be guaranteed a majority. A total of 250 would leave the party 76 seats short of the 326 needed for an overall majority.

But it would nevertheless represent a huge change from the earlier 102-seat projection.

The difference demonstrates one of the central problems with interpreting MRP polls as if they were forecasts of a certain election result. They are models based on polling data, demographic characteristics and assumptions about how voting behaviour translates into individual constituencies. If national support changes, the projected parliamentary map can change dramatically.

Indeed, More in Common says 214 constituency projections changed between its July and September models, with 143 of those changes moving towards Labour.

The latest model therefore provides a very different picture from the headline of Labour being reduced to 102 MPs.

Reeves and the danger facing senior Labour figures

Despite Labour’s improved overall position in the September model, the vulnerability of some senior politicians remains significant.

Rachel Reeves is one of the clearest examples.

More in Common’s latest projection says some senior Labour figures would still be at risk of losing their constituencies. Reeves is among those identified as vulnerable, although the exact constituency-level calculations are dependent on the model and the current distribution of support.

Ed Miliband is also projected to be in serious danger. His Doncaster North constituency is described as a Labour-Reform marginal, with the model putting Reform just one point ahead.

That is particularly striking because Doncaster North has traditionally been associated strongly with Labour politics.

The political significance extends beyond one individual politician. If senior cabinet ministers begin appearing in genuinely competitive constituency contests, it becomes much harder for Labour to treat the next election as a straightforward defence of its 2024 majority.

Angela Rayner’s position is rather different.

The latest More in Common model projects Rayner to retain Ashton-under-Lyne by eight points. That is considerably more comfortable than the earlier projection which suggested she could lose her seat.

The contrast is a useful reminder that the political fortunes of individual MPs can move substantially as voting intentions change.

A volatile electoral map

The latest MRP also highlights the extraordinary volatility of British politics.

Almost half of the seats in the model are projected to be won by fewer than five percentage points. More in Common calculates that 48 per cent of seats would be decided by margins below five points, while 137 would have margins below two points.

That means relatively small changes in voter behaviour could alter the parliamentary arithmetic considerably.

Labour’s 250-seat projection is therefore not a prediction that the party will necessarily win 250 seats at the next general election. It is a snapshot based on current polling and modelling assumptions.

The same applies to Reform UK.

The party’s September projection of 147 seats is dramatically lower than the 293 seats it was projected to win in July. In turn, that July figure was far below some of the even more dramatic projections made earlier in 2026.

More in Common says Reform’s projected total has fallen from 381 seats in January to 324 in April, 293 in July and 147 in September.

That sequence demonstrates how quickly Britain’s electoral picture can change.

What happened to the 102-seat Labour scenario?

The answer is simple: the underlying political numbers changed.

The earlier MRP showed Labour on just 102 seats because the party’s vote share was much weaker and Reform was performing exceptionally strongly across numerous constituencies.

The September model puts Labour’s vote share at 26 per cent, compared with 24 per cent for Reform, 22 per cent for the Conservatives and 11 per cent for the Liberal Democrats.

Under Britain’s first-past-the-post electoral system, relatively small changes in vote share can produce very large changes in seat totals.

That is why Labour can move from a projected 102 seats to 250 without its national vote share necessarily changing by an enormous amount.

It is also why headlines based on individual MRP projections need to be read carefully.

The 102-seat figure was genuine within the earlier model, but it should not be presented as the latest estimate of Labour’s parliamentary strength.

The Reeves, Rayner and Miliband question

The fate of Reeves, Rayner and Miliband illustrates three different aspects of the political situation.

Reeves has faced the question of whether Labour can defend vulnerable constituencies while dealing with difficult economic choices.

Rayner’s projected position has improved substantially in the latest model, showing how constituency-level results can shift as national voting patterns change.

Miliband’s situation remains more precarious. His Doncaster North seat is currently modelled as a Labour-Reform marginal, with the latest projection putting him on the wrong side of a one-point gap.

None of these projections guarantees that any individual MP will lose or retain their seat. They are modelled estimates rather than actual election results.

That distinction matters particularly when dealing with high-profile politicians. A one-point projected margin can disappear quickly through turnout changes, tactical voting, candidate effects or changes in national polling.

A different Labour party under Burnham

The latest figures have emerged during a major change in Labour’s political leadership.

Andy Burnham is now prime minister and Labour leader, and his first party conference as leader produced a different political agenda from the previous period.

Labour’s conference included proposals and debates on Britain’s relationship with Europe, electoral reform, social care, public ownership and other issues. The party itself describes Burnham as prime minister and leader in its published conference material.

More in Common’s latest analysis argues that Labour’s electoral position has improved since the end of Keir Starmer’s premiership.

It says Labour’s projected seats have risen by 140 compared with its July MRP, including 101 seats recovered from Reform UK.

That does not remove the party’s problems.

Labour would still be far below its 2024 total of 411 seats. It would also be unable to form a majority government on the September numbers alone.

Labour and the Liberal Democrats together would reach 313 seats, still 13 short of an overall majority. Labour, the Liberal Democrats and SNP would reach 340.

The arithmetic therefore points towards a potentially complicated parliament rather than a straightforward return to the two-party politics of previous decades.

The real lesson from the 102-seat bombshell

The most striking aspect of the 102-seat headline may ultimately be what happened afterwards.

A projection that once showed Labour approaching historic defeat has been followed by another model showing the party as the largest force in parliament.

That does not mean either projection should be treated as a definitive prediction.

Instead, the sequence highlights the instability of Britain’s current electoral landscape.

Reform’s rapid rise, the Conservatives’ recovery, Labour’s subsequent improvement and the emergence of smaller parties have created a parliamentary map in which hundreds of constituencies could be highly competitive.

For Reeves, Rayner, Miliband and other senior Labour politicians, the message is therefore more complicated than simply “gone” or “safe”.

Some are projected to be fighting extremely close contests. Others have regained a more comfortable position. And the national picture itself remains capable of changing dramatically between one MRP and the next.

The 102-seat Labour projection remains an important snapshot of how vulnerable the party appeared at one point in 2026. But the latest evidence shows that it is no longer the current central projection.

With Labour now modelled at 250 seats, Reform at 147 and the Conservatives at 125, the political battle is no longer simply about whether Labour could collapse.

It is about whether any party can turn volatile public opinion into a stable parliamentary majority.

For now, the polling evidence points to a highly competitive and fragmented political landscape — one in which the difference between a historic defeat and becoming the largest party can change surprisingly quickly.