Category Archives: Press Releases

Statement re Complaint by Mr Dominic Cummings

The BPC today received a complaint from Mr Dominic Cummings about a poll conducted by YouGov for the CBI.

On receipt, any complaint is initially examined by the three principal officers of the British Polling Council, Prof. John Curtice (President), Mr Nick Moon (secretary) and Mr Simon Atkinson (committee member).

Unfortunately in expressing an initial provisional view about the complaint to his fellow officers Mr Moon copied Mr Cummings in to the relevant email and in so doing used some unnecessarily offensive language. For the latter Mr Moon has apologised unreservedly to Mr Cummings.

However, Mr Cummings appears to have taken the email as the determination of the BPC on his complaint and chosen to make Mr Moon’s provisional views public knowledge. In this Mr Cummings was clearly mistaken. The BPC has not made any determination on the matter, and apologises to YouGov and the CBI for its role in any unnecessary embarrassment that has been caused.

In view of this incident, the initial determination on Mr Cummings complaint will now be made by Prof. Curtice and Mr Atkinson alone.


British Polling Council opposes Bill on Regulating Opinion Polls

The British Polling Council (BPC) urges the House of Lords to reject the private members bill on the regulation of opinion polls that is being presented today by Lord Foulkes.

The Bill proposes that an authority be established that would regulate polls of voting intentions for all elections and referendums in the United Kingdom. The authority would be empowered to specify approved ways for selecting who should be interviewed, how the questions in polls should be worded and to ban the publication of voting intention polls during an election campaign.

Who is interviewed by a poll and how the questions it asks are phrased are important issues. How any poll has addressed them should always be clearly stated, as the rules of the BPC require. But they are not issues that are susceptible to straightforwardly ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ answers. Professional researchers can and do disagree about how polls should be conducted and how they should be worded. They regularly experiment and test alternative and new ways of doing polls and asking questions in order to improve their methods. Imposing regulatory standards would put at risk the experimentation and competition that are essential to improving the ways in which polls are conducted.

Banning the publication of polls during an election campaign would not mean that polls were not conducted. It would simply mean that access to their results would be confined to those who could afford to pay for polls, such as the banks and the political parties, or who knew where to find the results on an overseas website. Only the ordinary voter, who is meant to be central to the democratic process, would be left out of the loop. It could potentially open the way for politicians to claim that their private polling showed them ahead, regardless of what their polling actually showed, or indeed whether it existed at all.

Doubtless many people feel that in underestimating the Conservative vote and overestimating Labour’s, the polls provided unhelpful misinformation during the recent general election campaign. That is why the BPC has established an independent inquiry into why the polls were wrong and how their conduct might be improved in future. Indeed, the first meeting of that inquiry, at which BPC members will be presenting – in public – their initial findings as to what went wrong, is being held today.

Professor John Curtice, President of the British Polling Council, said, ‘What is needed now is a critical and open appraisal of where the polls went wrong, not the heavy hand of regulation that in attempting to impose common standards would make it more likely that the polls all get it wrong again in future. As any economic forecaster knows too well, forecasting how people will behave is always a difficult enterprise. No-one has yet suggested that, despite their many errors, economic forecasting should be regulated, and it is not clear why attempting to anticipate how people will vote should be treated any differently.’

Notes for Editors:

  • The British Polling Council (BPC) is an association of polling organisations that publish polls. The objectives of the Council are to ensure standards of disclosure that provide consumers of survey results that enter the public domain with an adequate basis for judging the reliability and validity of the results. Website: Twitter: @BritPollingCncl
  • The first meeting of the inquiry is at The Royal Statistical Society, 12 Erroll St, London EC1Y 8LX at 1.30 pm on 19 June. Anyone who wishes to attend should register at BPC/MRS Polling Inquiry meetings
  • Members of the inquiry are Dr. Nick Baker, Group CEO, Quadrangle Research Group Ltd; Dr. Mario Callegaro, Senior Survey Research Scientist, Google UK ; Dr. Stephen Fisher, Associate Professor of Political Sociology, University of Oxford, who runs the Electionsetc website; Dr. Jouni Kuha, Associate Professor of Statistics, London School of Economics and lead statistician for the BBC/ITV/Sky exit poll; Prof. Jane Green, Professor of Political Science, University of Manchester and Co-Director of the 2015 British Election Study; Prof. Will Jennings, Professor of Political Science and Public Policy, University of Southampton, and a member of the Polling Observatory team; Dr Ben Lauderdale, Associate Professor in Research Methodology, London School of Economics and one of the team behind the website; Dr. Patten Smith, Research Director, Research Methods Centre, Ipsos MORI and Chair of the Social Research Association.
  • Details of Lord Foulkes’ bill can be found at: Regulation of Political Opinion Polling Bill [HL] 2015-16

For further information, please contact a member of the BPC Management Committee:

Simon Atkinson: 07791 680770
Nick Moon: 07770 564664
John Curtice 07710 348755

Details of Opinion Poll Inquiry Announced

The British Polling Council (BPC) publishes today further details of the Inquiry into the performance of the opinion polls that it has established in collaboration with the Market Research Society (MRS).

​Under the chairmanship of Prof. Patrick Sturgis, Director of the National Centre for Research Methods at the University of Southampton, the Inquiry is charged with the task of establishing the degree of inaccuracy in the polls, the reasons for the inaccuracies it identifies, and whether the findings and conduct of the polls were adequately communicated to the general public. Due to report by 1 March next year, the Inquiry will seek and welcomes submissions from all interested parties, and is empowered both to make recommendations about the future practice of polling and, where appropriate, for changes in the rules of the BPC. The BPC and MRS are committed to publishing the Inquiry’s report in full.

​Eight people with professional expertise and experience in conducting and analyzing survey and polling data, have agreed to serve (unpaid) as members of the Inquiry. None of them were directly involved in conducting published polls during the election campaign. They are as follows:

  • ​Dr. Nick Baker, Managing Director, Quadrangle Research
  • ​Dr. Mario Callegaro, Senior Survey Research Scientist, Google UK
  • Dr. Stephen Fisher, Associate Professor of Political Sociology, University of Oxford, who runs the Electionsetc website
  • Dr. Jouni Kuha, Associate Professor of Statistics, London School of Economics and lead statistician for the BBC/ITV/Sky exit poll
  • ​Prof. Jane Green, Professor of Political Science, University of Manchester and Co-Director of the 2015 British Election Study
  • ​Prof. Will Jennings, Professor of Political Science and Public Policy, University of Southampton, and a member of the Polling Observatory team.
  • ​Dr Ben Lauderdale, Associate Professor in Research Methodology, London School of Economics and one of the team behind the election forecast website.
  • ​Dr. Patten Smith, Research Director, Research Methods Centre, Ipsos MORI and Chair of the Social Research Association.

​Information about the work of the Inquiry will be available via a website launched today at National Centre for Research Methods (NCRM). As a first step the Inquiry is inviting written submissions, which can be uploaded via the website. A public meeting will be held during the afternoon of 19 June at the Royal Statistical Society, London, where there will be an opportunity to discuss the work of the Inquiry. The event will be free to attend but registration will be required. Registration will open, via the NCRM website, on Tuesday 26 May. Further information and updates about the conduct of the inquiry will be made available on the website thereafter.

​Prof. John Curtice, President of the British Polling Council, said, ‘The polls clearly gave the public a misleading impression of the likely outcome of the 2015 election and this shaped the reporting of the campaign. The Council is committed to ensuring that there should a thorough and transparent investigation into what apparently went wrong, and how both the conduct and the reporting of the polls might be improved in future. We are deeply grateful to Prof. Sturgis and the members of the Inquiry, all of whom have substantial professional expertise in the methodology and analysis of surveys, for agreeing to conduct this Inquiry.’

Jane Frost CBE, MRS’ Chief Executive said, “As the world’s leading research association, we are actively supporting the British Polling Council in its investigation. We continue to support all of our accredited members in ensuring standards are met. Market research is a UK success story, the UK is a world leader in this sector, contributing over £3.6bn to the UK economy. We continue to learn, adapt and innovate.”

For further information:

Notes to Editors

  1. The full details of the Terms of the Reference of the Inquiry are appended to this release.
  2. The British Polling Council (BPC) is an association of polling organisations that publish polls. The Council promotes standards of disclosure that are designed to provide consumers of survey results that enter the public domain with an adequate basis for judging the reliability and validity of the results. Most of the companies that conducted polls of voting intention at the 2015 UK general election are members. Further details can be found at
  3. The Market Research Society (MRS) is the world’s leading professional research association, training and regulating the research sector in the UK. The research sector is a major UK industry worth a conservative £3.6bn (GVA) per annum.
  4. The original announcement of the establishment of the Inquiry can be found at General Election: 7 May 2015

BPC/MRS Inquiry into the Performance of the Opinion Polls at the 2015 General Election.

Terms of Reference

  1. To assess the accuracy of the published opinion polls (both national and sub-national) at the 2015 general election.
  2. To evaluate whether any inaccuracies identified might be part of a pattern evident at previous elections.
  3. To investigate the causes of any inaccuracies that are identified. Potential causes to be considered will include (but not necessarily be limited to): the possible impact of late changes in vote preferences, sampling methods, interview mode, weighting and filtering, population coverage, item refusal, differential availability and willingness to participate, question order and wording.
  4. To assess whether the analysis or reporting of polls was influenced by a reluctance to be out of line with the published figures of other polls.
  5. To consult and seek relevant evidence from all appropriate stakeholders, including but not exclusively, polling organisations that are members of the BPC.
  6. To assess whether adequate information was provided and communicated to interested commentators and the public about how polls were conducted and what their results meant.
  7. To make, as it sees fit, recommendations for improving how opinion polls are conducted and published in future.
  8. To make recommendations, if necessary, for changing the rules and obligations of BPC membership.
  9. To submit a report to the BPC and MRS by 1 March 2016, with a view to its publication by BPC and MRS as soon as possible thereafter.

General Election: 7 May 2015

The final opinion polls before the election were clearly not as accurate as we would like, and the fact that all the pollsters underestimated the Conservative lead over Labour suggests that the methods that were used should be subject to careful, independent investigation.

The British Polling Council, supported by the Market Research Society, is therefore setting up an independent enquiry to look into the possible causes of this apparent bias, and to make recommendations for future polling.

We are pleased to announce that Professor Patrick Sturgis, who is Professor of Research Methodology and Director of the ESRC National Centre for Research Methods, has agreed to chair the enquiry, and will take the lead in setting its terms of reference. The membership of the enquiry will be announced in due course.

The headline results for the final opinion polls are set out below:

Con Lab Lib Dem UKIP Green Other Method Sample Size Fieldwork
% % % % % % n
Opinium 35 34 8 12 6 5 online 2960 May 4-5
Survation 31 31 10 16 5 7 online 4088 May 4-6
Ipsos MORI 36 35 8 11 5 5 telephone 1186 May 5-6
ICM 34 35 9 11 4 7 telephone 2023 May 3-6
ComRes 35 34 9 12 4 6 telephone 2015 May 3-5
Populus 33 33 10 14 5 6 online 3917 May 5-6
YouGov 34 34 10 12 4 6 online 10307 May 4-6
Panelbase 31 33 8 16 5 7 online 3019 May 4-6
Average 33.6 33.6 9 13 4.8 6.1
Result 37.8 31.2 8.1 12.9 3.8 6.3
Difference -4.2 2.4 0.9 0.1 1 -0.2

Statement concerning private polls

Following a request from ICM, the Officers of the British Polling Council have considered how its rules of disclosure should apply in the case of a private poll of four Liberal Democrat held constituencies, some details of which were published in The Guardian this morning.

Rule 2.6 of the council states that, ‘Organisations conducting privately commissioned surveys have the right to maintain the confidentiality of survey findings’ However, it goes on to state that, ‘in the event the results of a privately commissioned poll are made public by the organisation [its employees or agents] that commissioned the survey, such results will be deemed to have entered the public domain’ and that consequently the council’s rules of disclosure apply. Those rules require, inter alia, that details of the survey including computer tabulations of the results, methodology and the client commissioning the survey be published on the company’s website.

BPC’s officers welcome the fact that, following the leak of the results, ICM have immediately published details of the survey including computer tabulations of the results, and in so doing have also indicated that the client was a ‘member of the Liberal Democrats’. The publication of this information should allow anyone who wishes to do so to undertake a critical scrutiny of the research, which is the purpose of rules to which all BPC members aim to adhere. The rules are intended to enable any reader of poll to reach a reasonable judgment on the likely quality or reliability of a poll. The name of the client is included in the rules for disclosure because it may be considered germane by readers of the poll if the poll was commissioned by an organization that campaigns on one side of an issue.

It should, however, be noted that the requirement upon BPC members to publish the details of results of private polls, including of the commissioning client, only applies when those results have been published by the client or by someone acting on their behalf. To the best of our knowledge the source of the leak to The Guardian is not known, including to ICM itself, and thus it has not been established that the source was either the commissioner or someone acting on their behalf. Unless these circumstances change, the officers take the view that ICM are not obliged by BPC’s rules to disclose any further information about the poll.

Accuracy of the Final 2010 Polls

8th May 2010

The table below compares the final estimates of the outcome of the General Election made by companies that are members of the British Polling Council (BPC) with the actual result across Great Britain as a whole.

While not proving as accurate as the 2005 polls, which were the most accurate predictions ever made of the outcome of a British general election, the polls nevertheless told the main story of the 2010 election — that the Conservatives had established a clear lead. All but one of the nine pollsters came within 2% of the Conservative share, and five were within 1%.

The tendency at past elections for polls to overestimate Labour came to an abrupt end, with every pollster underestimating the Labour share of the vote, though all but one were within 3%. However, every pollster overestimated the Liberal Democrat share of the vote.

Con Lab LibDem Other Average Error
% % % % %
Angus Reid 36 24 29 11 3.25
Com Res 37 28 28 7 2.25
Harris 35 29 27 10 1.5
ICM 36 28 26 10 1.25
Ipsos MORI 36 29 27 8 1.75
Opinium 35 27 26 12 2.25
Populus 37 28 27 8 1.75
TNS BMRB 33 27 29 11 3.25
YouGov 35 28 28 9 2.25
Actual Result 37 30 24 10

NOTE. The table includes the final poll conducted by each company where that poll was conducted either wholly or partly on or after Monday 3rd May. Average error is the average of the difference between the poll result and the actual result across all four estimates.

Further information:-

  • Nick Moon (GfK NOP) 020 7890 9830
  • Andrew Cooper (Populus) 020 7253 9465

Polls Commit To Speedy Disclosure In 2010 Election

2nd April 2010

Britain’s opinion pollsters announce today that they have committed themselves to releasing speedily the technical details of all voting intention polls published during the course of the general election campaign. In the event of a May 6th election, members of the British Polling Council, who between them comprise nearly all the companies who undertake opinion polls in the UK, have agreed they will place the key details of all polls published on or after Thursday 8th April on their web sites within at most 18 hours of their initial publication. These details will include:

The precise wording of the questions asked

The sample size, how and when interviews were conducted, and how the data have been weighted to ensure they are representative.

Computer tables showing the breakdown of the results for key demographic groups.

John Curtice, President of the British Polling Council, said, ‘Opinion polls often play an important role in shaping the mood and rhythm of an election campaign, sometimes controversially so. It is therefore important that they should be as open and transparent as possible about how their results have been obtained. This commitment will ensure that anyone who is interested in or has concerns about a particular poll will be able to ascertain quickly and easily for themselves just exactly how it was conducted.’

Notes to Editors.

  1. The British Polling Council (BPC) was founded in 2004 with the primary object of promoting the disclosure of the technical details of the results of published opinion polls so that consumers can be make an informed judgement as to the reliability and validity of their results. Further details can be found at
  2. Under its rules of disclosure, BPC members are usually required to make the technical details of polls available within 2 working days of initial publication. This new 18 hour commitment, which will operate during the 4 weeks immediately prior to polling day, will ensure these details are available more quickly at a time when polls are the subject of particular media interest and commentary.
  3. The membership of the Council currently comprises:
    • Angus Reid
    • Cello MRUK
    • ComRes
    • Dods Polling
    • GFK-NOP
    • Harris Interactive
    • ICM
    • Ipsos MORI
    • Marketing Means
    • Opinion Research Business
    • Opinium
    • Populus
    • TNS System Three
    • YouGov
  4. For further details contact John Curtice on 07710-348 755, Andrew Cooper on 07500-858626, or Nick Moon on 07770-564 664.

ComRes and BBC Watchdog Programme

2nd December 2008

The British Polling Council (BPC) has received a complaint concerning a research project by ComRes for the BBC’s Watchdog programme.

In all over 24,000 people responded to an invitation by the BBC Watchdog programme to complete an online questionnaire. In its report ComRes confirmed that it is a member of the BPC and prominently set out the specific BPC requirements for information that, under the objects and rules of the BPC, must accompany the publication of polls and surveys.

It should be understood that the BPC is concerned only with polls and surveys that set out to measure the opinions of representative samples, for example the views of all adults, or all voters. Therefore, the publication of results must include a statement specifying the universe (all adults / voters etc) effectively represented.

In the view of the management committee of the BPC, the project conducted by BBC Watchdog and ComRes cannot be considered to be a poll or survey as defined by the BPC simply because the results are a simple addition of the responses given by people who decided to log on and answer the questions. Demographic questions were not included in the online questionnaire. Therefore it is impossible to know whether the results obtained are representative of all adults or not, and impossible to weight the data to reflect the demographic profile of all adults.

ComRes understand and accept that the project should not have been described as a survey within a meaning that would qualify it to fall within the BPC rules, and have undertaken not to make any such claims in future. On this basis the BPC has decided to take no further action.

Further information:-

New President for British Polling Council

7th October 2008

The British Polling Council is very pleased to announce that Professor John Curtice has agreed to become the new President of the organisation.

John takes over the role from John Barter who has been President since the formation of the British Polling Council in 2004. John wishes to retire from the role and give the new incumbent ample time to assume the responsibilities of President before the next election. All members of the BPC would like to thank John for his stewardship of the BPC over the past few years and wish him well in his retirement.

John Curtice is Professor of Politics and Director of the Social Statistics Laboratory at the University of Strathclyde. He was co-director of the British Election Study, the principal academic survey based study of voting behaviour, from 1983 to 1997, and has been a co-editor of NatCen’s British Social Attitudes series since 1994. He has written and commentated widely in the media and in academic publications on polls and polling, and worked at some stage in collaboration with all the current major polling companies. He was also a member of the Market Research Society’s enquiry into the conduct of opinion polls after the 1992 general election.

The code of the British Polling Council has been effective in ensuring that consumers of poll information have sufficient information available on which to judge the validity of results. John will be working together with the officers of BPC and with the full co-operation of all members to ensure that standards of disclosure are maintained and our rules enhanced wherever necessary to ensure full compliance by all members.

Further information:-

Complaint against Ipsos MORI regarding Publication of Results for a survey for Transport for London

21st May 2007

A meeting of the members of the British Polling Council (BPC) was held on Friday 16th May. Discussion concerned an Ipsos MORI survey for Transport for London, aspects of which were released to the press by the Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone on 18th December.

At the time of publication by Mr Livingstone, Mr Henry de Zoete sought further specific information from Ipsos MORI. When this was not forthcoming, Mr De Zoete complained to the BPC that Ipsos MORI was in breach of its rules.

The BPC appointed a Disclosure Committee to examine the complaint made by Mr De Zoete. This Committee concluded that the findings of the survey did fall under BPC rules following release by the Mayor of London, and that Ipsos MORI did not act in conformity to these rules when it did not make available full details of the survey when it was requested to do so. This conclusion was accepted in full by the Management Committee of the British Polling Council.

Ipsos MORI has accepted the findings of the British Polling Council and has apologised for not making the information available when requested. As Ipsos MORI has now made available computer tables from its survey, the full meeting of the BPC decided to take no further action against the company.

In order to prevent a recurrence of this problem, Ipsos MORI and other members of the BPC will carefully review the contracts entered into with clients to ensure that these contracts do not conflict with their obligations under the Objects and Rules of the BPC.

Members re-affirmed that the rules of the BPC cover all polls and surveys they conduct that are published and where there is a legitimate public interest in the full findings being made publicly available. Members also agreed that the rules of BPC do not conflict with the obligations of members to other associations to which they may belong, including the Market Research Society and ESOMAR.

Members of the British Polling Council will be working to clarify certain aspects of the rules to ensure that all members are in future clear as to their responsibilities under the code.

Further information:-