Event: British Polling Lessons from 2024

A public event, organised by the BPC, in association with the Market Research Society, was held on 6^th May 2025 to reflect on the lessons learned to date. In a series of talks, representatives of BPC member organisations presented a synthesis of the analysis conducted to date. The event also provided an opportunity for representatives of the academic, media and political communities to share their perspectives. Download the presentations here (23MB pptx).

The British Polling Council held an open event on 6^th May where we will be exploring the lessons learned from the recent UK general election and its aftermath.

Practitioners from across the polling sector shared latest findings of their post-election analysis. They were joined by representatives of the academic, media and political communities, who also shared their perspectives,

Here is a short summary of some of the themes emerging from the event. 

• Systematic polling error: Most pollsters overestimated Labour’s vote share in the recent election – the largest overestimation of Labour since 1979. This reflects a historical pattern where UK polls often overstate Labour support, though the specific causes remain unclear despite multiple potential factors being discussed.

 • Methodological challenges: Several technical polling issues were examined, including demographic weighting (particularly for education, age groups like 75+, and ethnicity), handling of “don’t knows” and refusals, and the significant problem of declining response rates leading to potential differential non-response bias. Pollsters are awaiting the British Election Study random probability post-election survey for greater insight into the potential impacts of differential non-response bias in 2024. 

 • MRP polling developments: MRP (Multilevel Regression and Post-stratification) constituency-level polling was a major focus, with discussions about its growing importance but also limitations — particularly in unusual constituencies with independent candidates or local factors. Experts called for increased transparency in how these complex models work and better communication of uncertainty, especially for individual constituency estimates.

 • Media representation concerns: There was significant worry about how polls (especially MRPs) are presented by journalists, who often treat projections as certainties rather than estimates with margins of error. This can potentially damage polling credibility and inappropriately influence campaigns and voters.

 • Future recommendations: Suggestions included developing standardised guidelines for MRP reporting, improving handling of late-deciding voters, embracing methodological pluralism, exploring mixed-method approaches, and enhancing transparency – all while acknowledging that 2028/29 may present even greater polling challenges due to fragmentation, especially for MRP estimates and their uncertainties given knife-edge races.

Download the slides here  (23MB pptx)

For more information and resources, please see our 2024 General Election Page

The post Polling Lessons from 2024 appeared first on British Polling Council.

Savanta, 60 Great Portland St, London W1W 7RT, and also online

In attendance:

• Professor Jane Green – President
• Simon Atkinson – Management Committee member
• Nick Moon – Secretary/Treasurer
• Adam Drummond – Opinium
• Joe Twyman – Deltapoll 
• Anthony Wells – YouGov
• Chris Hopkins – Savanta
• Bill White – Lucid Talk 
• Martin Baxter – Electoral Calculus

Attending online

• Damian Lyons Lowe – Survation
• Joe Dyble – Mortar
• Owen Thomas – Yonder
• Steve McGee – One Poll
• Richard Crawshaw – Verian
• Luke Tryl – More in Common
• Anouschka Rajah – More in Common
• Chris Holbrook – Findoutnow
• Milan Kaster – Lucid Talk
• Sam Hoar – Strand Partners
• Robert Struthers – BMG
• Vasil Lazarov – Survation
• Gideon Skinner – Ipsos
• Ivor Knox – Norstat
• Seb Wilde – Public First
• Nick Baker – Savanta
• Jim Blagden – More in Common
• James Kanagasooriam – Focal data
• Kieran Kumaria – Stack
• Ed Hodgson – YouGov

1. Apologies for absence

Johnny Heald – ORB, Gregor Jackson – Walnut, Philip van Scheltinga – Redfield and Wilton

2. Minutes of the last AGM

These had already been approved by Members

3. Officers’ reports

• Financial report

The financial position remains healthy, with an increase over the year in our effective balance of £1,000, at just over £28,000. The Treasurer’s report was received with no questions.

• Disclosure issues dealt with by the officers

There had been one complaint that was upheld about data not being made available within the specified period, but as it had already been posted before the complaint was made, no further action was taken.

• Membership applications dealt with by the officers

Five organisations had successfully applied to join during the year, and one had left.

• Web and social media report

Simon Atkinson’s report had already been circulated to members. He reiterated our policy of not entering into debates on X or to respond to posts. As suggested at the last AGM we have posted a pinned comment saying the BPC doesn’t reply via X and people should write to us formally.

• Nextgen Pollsters Update

Again, Simon Atkinson’s report had been circulated prior to the meeting. It was noted that the group continues to do well.

4. President’s report

In addressing her written report, the President drew particular attention to the potential reputational risk to the industry, and to the high levels of demand placed on the BPC (especially during an election year) and contrasted this with the BPC’s limited infrastructure. A plea was made for members to approach their own legal departments for assistance with a wider redraft of the BPC Rules, and NB and AW agreed to do this.

It was noted that we need a c30 minute segment on MRP for the online journalist’s training course at the NCTJ, and to update our training resources more generally. JK volunteered assistance with this, and NB pointed out that the MRS has dedicated training staff we could perhaps draw on for the admin side.

The President thanked Findoutnow for sponsoring drinks at the recent event, and More in Common for offering support for the AGM.

5. Appointment of the officers

All three Officers were re-elected nem con.

6. MRS/BPC internal event

The President gave details of this event, which is a closed-doors event only for those Members who are also members of the MRS. It will be held at the MRS on 24 March, and invites will go out this week.

7. May 6 BPC public event

This event, intended as a postmortem on the election, will be held at Westminster Central Hall.

• Content

The President expressed concern that there was still relatively little by way of postmortem analysis by Members on the BPC website, and encouraged Members to produce at least provisional analysis by the end of March, to allow an agenda to be drawn up for the meeting.

It was agreed that it wasn’t necessary for the BPC to come up with a single answer to present at the meeting, but at the same time it was recognized that it would not be helpful to have a series of speakers saying possibly contradictory things.

It was agreed that the outcome of the MRS/BPC meeting might provide a good structure for the May event.

• Costs

The venue hire and refreshments will cost around £4,000. The cost of providing lunch for delegates before the event would be around £2,000, and Members agreed to go ahead with this.

8. Proposed changes to the rules

• Adding new Rule 2.8

The president outlined the conversations she had been having with the Electoral Commission about potential requirements for clients to be registered with the Commission. While there is no legal risk to members there is potential reputational risk to the industry.

Members were broadly unhappy with the burden this might impose, and the Officers agreed to suggest a redraft to be circulated later.

• Amendment to Rule 2.3

The Secretary/Treasurer explained that the requirement of full disclosure of all relevant questions to prevent cherry-picking by clients had been inserted in a section on private polling when the original intention had been for it to cover all polling.

Members expressed concern, not about moving the requirement from one section to another, but rather because they were unhappy with the requirement itself.

LT made the point that the requirement might make clients less willing to conduct message testing research, and suggested that the requirement should only cover questions asked before the ones published. AW referred to the risk of clients “lying by omission”.

It was agreed that the Officers would discuss and circulate a new draft.

9. Initial discussion on further rule changes

Following on from the previous two agenda items, the President said that the Officers were aware that the BPC Rules had failed to keep pace with events, and that on several occasions close scrutiny has revealed imprecise drafting. Members were therefore invited to give thoughts to a broader redraft of the Rules. To provide some context a blog from Mark Pack had been circulated prior to the AGM, though it was stressed that the Officers were not specifically recommending any of his proposals, and a similar document from a Member unable to attend will be attached to the Minutes.

• Disclosure Rules for MRP

The President noted that most of the press and other enquiries she had dealt with during the election concerned MRP reports, and that the Rules have relatively little to say on these.

It was agreed that a working party would be formed of those working on MRP to draw up some proposed guidelines on disclosure.

As time was running out there was no discussion on this, but Members agreed to respond to the two background documents, and to make any other comments they felt would be helpful.

10. Any Other Business

Time prevented any AOB being raised, but DLL subsequently in writing referred back to the point in the President’s report about AI in polling, and linked this to the point in the Pack blog about what should be disclosed about the source of panel data. He felt this was something that should be considered in any redraft of the Rules.

The post Minutes of the Annual General Meeting 2025 appeared first on British Polling Council.

Event: British Polling Lessons from 2024

A public event, organised by the BPC, in association with the Market Research Society, was held on 6^th May 2025 to reflect on the lessons learned to date. In a series of talks, representatives of BPC member organisations presented a synthesis of the analysis conducted to date. The event also provided an opportunity for representatives of the academic, media and political communities to share their perspectives. Download the presentations here (23MB pptx).

Preliminary Findings from BPC members

In the section below, BPC member organisations share their early research findings on the experience of 2024 and what it means for future polling practice. Some members share data and/or further information about their existing and ongoing research, and links can be found in their individual submissions. 

We will update this page as additional research has taken place and all post-election data (including from the random probability British Election Study) are available.

In the challenging context of predicting electoral outcomes, BMG Research is delighted to be among the most accurate pollsters for the 2024 General Election.

Professor Will Jennings’ analysis, highlights our performance as one of the most accurate in terms of total absolute error.

Improving polling accuracy report

Overall the industry polling, including those polls conducted by Electoral Calculus and Find Out Now, overestimated the Labour lead at the 2024 general election.

Polling errors in 2024

Following the election Find Out Now has conducted an internal investigation into the likely cause of election polling error (in addition to the based on polling from our panel).

Find Out Now and the 2024 General Election

We recently completed our internal review of our polling performance and methodological approaches for the 2024 UK general election, analysing both traditional and MRP polling. We are pleased to now be able to present the findings publicly.

Review into our performance at the 2024 UK general election.

Ipsos UK 2024 Election Review Initial Conclusions (ppt)

Over the last few months, we have looked into where we think our General Election polling went well, and the areas we need to improve if we want to continue to make our polling as accurate as possible…

Our 2024 Election Polling: Lessons Learned

Survation’s analysis on 2024 lessons could be included in our round up of evidence.

Review of Survation’s 2024 General Election Telephone Polling (pdf)

2024 General Election MRP Model Post-mortem (pdf)

2024 General Election Cati Recontacts Tables (xls)

EPOP 2024 Luke Taylor voter age profile 2024 (pdf 282kb)

Reflections on 2024 General Election Political Polling (pdf 361kb)

YouGov’s model was the most accurate in terms of seats and the second most accurate for vote share – but there are ways we could have been more accurate still

A summary of YouGov’s review into our 2024 general election performance

The post The 2024 General Election appeared first on British Polling Council.

As the table below shows, the long-term tendency for the final polls to over-state Labour and under-state Conservative support remains in play. 

For the each of the remaining parties, the average error across the polling organisations are within 2 points.

MRP overview

This election saw the publication of a series of seat projections based on MRP analysis techniques. Here we set out the final projections released by BPC members, covering all those using survey data with fieldwork running into the last five days of the campaign.

The post The Performance of the Polls in the 2024 General Election appeared first on British Polling Council.

5^th June 2024, Wolfson Theatre, LSE (Cheng Kin Ku Building: CKK location here)

DOWNLOAD THE PRESENTATIONS HERE

AGENDA
Event Chair: Patrick Sturgis, LSE

2.00: INTRODUCTION

Welcome from the Chair: Patrick Sturgis,
LSE Setting the Scene: Jane Green, BPC President

2.20: PART ONE: WHERE ARE WE NOW?

Chaired by Sara Hobolt, LSE
Can we Trust the Polls? Will Jennings, Southampton/Sky
Can we use random sampling methods for polling? Joel Wiliams, Verian
Scotland: John Curtice, University of Strathclyde
What do past trends tell us about the present? Holly Day, Ipsos

3.10: Questions to the Panel

3.30: Break

4.00: PART TWO: ROUNTABLE ON MRP

Chaired by Jane Green, BPC President
Projecting Seats – an MRP Roundtable: Damian Lyons-Lowe, Survation; Martin Baxter, Electoral Calculus; Callum Hunter, JL Partners; Patrick English, YouGov

4.45: PART THREE: WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?

Chaired by Patrick Sturgis, LSE
What about the Don’t Knows? Paula Surridge, University of Bristol
Tactical Voting: Stephen Fisher, University of Oxford
What Might Change? Luke Tryl, More in Common
Election Night and The Exit Poll: Jouni Kuha, LSE

5.30: Questions to Panel & closing comments by Patrick Sturgis and Jane Green

From 6.00: Reception

The post Shedding Light on the UK General Election appeared first on British Polling Council.

In attendance

• Professor Sir John Curtice – President
• Professor Jane Green – President Elect
• Simon Atkinson – Management Committee member
• Nick Moon – Secretary/Treasurer
• Tom Holford – Censuswide
• Martin Boon – Deltapoll 
• Lachlan Rurlander – Whitestone Insight
• Chris Holbrook – Find Out Now 
• Chris Hopkins – Savanta
• Bill White – Lucid talk 
• Philip von Scheltinga – Redford and Wilton

Attending online

• Kingsley Woldegiorgis – Stonehaven
• Alex Morrison – Observunt
• Conleth Burns – More In Common
• Martin Baxter – Electoral Calculus
• Anthony Wells – YouGov
• Ivor Knox – Norstat
• Gregor Jackson – Walnut
• Kieran Kumaria – Stack Strategy
• Gideon Skinner – Ipsos
• Robert Struthers – BMG
• Seb Wilde – Public First
• Johnny Heald – ORB
• Tyron Surmon – More in Common
• John Wright – Maru
• Damian Lyons Lowe – Survation

1. Apologies for absence

None had been received

2. Minutes of the last AGM

These had already been approved by Members

3. Officers’ reports

• Financial report

The financial position is very healthy, with income of £8,650 and expenditure of £4,289.59 leaving a healthy balance of £27,183.36. The Treasurer’s report was  received with no questions

• Disclosure issues dealt with by the officers

There were no disclosure issues that hadn’t been immediately resolved

• Membership applications dealt with by the officers

Five organisations had successfully applied to join during the year. Damian Lyons Lowe raised the issue of Members describing themselves as “accredited by the BPC” rather than as “members of the BPC”. This is inaccurate and it was agreed that all Members would be reminded not to use the words “accredited” or “approved”

• Web and social media report

The BPC now has nearly 2000 followers on X. For the moment there are no plans to use other social media. It is policy not to enter into debates on X or to respond t posts. It was suggested that we should post a pinned comment saying the BPC doesn’t reply via X and people should write to us formally

4. President’s report 

In addition to his written report, the President said the BPC had felt obliged to respond to the debate following the recent YouGov MRP poll, and so put out press release saying YouGov hadn’t broken any rules.

In his valedictory remarks the President stressed that BPC has had to change and has done so successfully, and has a high reputation, underpinned by relatively little infrastructure.

5. Appointment of the officers

• President

Professor Jane Green was proposed by Nick Moon and seconded by Simon Atkinson

• Secretary/Treasurer

Nick Moon was proposed by Jane Green and seconded by Lochlan Rurlander

• Management Committee member

Simon Atkinson was proposed by Jane Green and seconded by Martin Boon

6. Proposal for Early Careers Network (Paper) J

The new President began by saying that she thought the  event had gone very well, and invited comments on the paper. Johnny Heald agreed the event had been a success and said that ORB would be happy to support the development of the network, and to sponsor future events. It was agreed that the pre election seminar should be late June, with the Officers mandated to make arrangements alongside the Early Careers Group. LSE is to be approached as a potential venue again

7. Role of BPC in qualitative research 

Martin Boon raised the point that there was an increasing tendency for people to quote broad findings from focus groups, without any background information on methodology – how many groups, who with, when etc – and he was concerned that the BPC might be open to criticism over this. There was discussion of the pros and cons but a consensus emerged that qualitative research did not fall within the definition of “polling” and thus fell outside the BPC’s remit. It was agreed not to take the idea of legislating for qualitative work any further.  However, if members wish to raise this again in future, the President highlighted that they are, of course, very welcome to do so. Damian Lyons Lowe suggested adding something on the BPC website saying why focus groups were different from polls, and why focus groups are not in our remit. The Officers to suggest a form of wording.

8. Any Other Business 

Jane Green thanked Savanta for hosting the event.

Nick Moon proposed a vote of thanks to John Curtice for all his work over 16 years. He announced that by way of thanks a cordless strimmer (for the allotment) and a Royal Opera House voucher were on their way to him, and also presented him with an abacus inscribed “You can count on your friends from the BPC”.

Martin Baxter thanked all those members who had contributed to the submission on the Census.

The post Minutes of the Annual General Meeting 2024 appeared first on British Polling Council.

Jane takes over the role from Professor Sir John Curtice, who has served as BPC President since 2008. The members of the British Polling Council would like to thank John for his stewardship of the BPC over a 16-year period which has witnessed four general elections, the Scotland and Brexit referendums and many local, regional and national campaigns.

Jane Green is Professor of Political Science and British Politics in the Department of Politics and International Relations, University of Oxford, and a Professorial Fellow of Nuffield College, where she is the Director of the Nuffield Politics Research Centre. She has been a Co-Director of the British Election Study since 2013 and is a regular commentator across national media on the topics of British public opinion and elections, as well as serving as an Election Analyst for ITV News election programming since 2015. She is a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and a Fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences, and was a member of the Polling Inquiry into the conduct of the 2015 opinion polls, established by the British Polling Council in collaboration with the Market Research Society.

As she takes over the role of President, Jane notes:

“I am very honoured to follow in the footsteps of the inimitable John Curtice. I, like all British Polling Council members, am very grateful to John for all his hard work and dedication. The British Polling Council performs an important role in promoting transparency in UK polling, and high standards of disclosure. As polls and polling come under increased scrutiny in this, the election year, it is a particular honour to support the British Polling Council’s work as the new President.”

Note to Editors:

The British Polling Council (BPC) is an association of polling organisations that publish polls and are committed to promoting transparency in polling.

The principal objective of the Council is to uphold standards of disclosure that ensure that consumers of survey results entering the public domain have an adequate basis for judging the reliability and validity of the results. By promoting high standards of disclosure, the Council aims to encourage the highest professional standards in public opinion polling and to advance the understanding and interpretation of poll results among politicians, the media and the general public. The BPC also provides interested parties with advice on best practice in reporting of polls, for example via our resources page on our website.

Full details of our remit and activities can be found at www.britishpollingcouncil.org

For more information, please contact: Nick Moon, BPC Secretary: nickmoon500@gmail.com

The post New President For The British Polling Council appeared first on British Polling Council.

There has been some controversy about the identity of the organisation that commissioned a recent YouGov MRP poll, the first results from which were published in The Daily Telegraph on 15 January. The organisation in question is the Conservative Britain Alliance.

Inter alia, the British Polling Council rules on disclosure state that:

All data and research findings made on the basis of social or political polls conducted in the United Kingdom by member organisations that enter the public domain, must include reference to the following:

• Client commissioning the survey;

This information, together with a range of other requirements about how a poll has been conducted and the details of the results are required to be posted on a member company’s website within two working days of initial publication.

In the case of this poll, extensive information was published on YouGov’s website on 15 January, and further information, as relevant, has been posted as further results from the poll have been published subsequently.

The BPC are aware that the Conservative Britain Alliance has not hitherto had any public profile, does not have a website, and is not known to be registered with, for example, Companies House, the Electoral Commission, or the Charities Commission.

However, the BPC have been advised that this is the organisation that was responsible for commissioning the poll, and that therefore there is no reason at present to believe that YouGov have not met their obligations under its rules. It is of course possible for any group of citizens to create a club, society or organisation whose activities do not require it to be registered with any body and which decides not to have a presence on the web.

The BPC would, of course, have no objection if further information about the commissioning organisation were to be made public, but this lies beyond its remit. Meanwhile, as is continually the case, the Council will be alive to identifying any lessons for its work that may be thought to arise from this incident.

The post YouGov MRP poll for Conservative Britain Alliance appeared first on British Polling Council.

By promoting high standards of disclosure, the BPC aims to encourage the highest professional standards in public opinion polling and to advance the understanding and interpretation of poll results among politicians, the media and the general public.

This role will, of course, be particularly important in the run-up to the general election, due to take place later this year.

However, it should be made clear that the BPC is neither an arbiter nor a guarantee of quality of polling. Our remit is solely to ensure transparency.

It is made very clear to BPC members that they are not allowed to suggest that their membership is any way a badge of quality.

Similarly, it is entirely inappropriate for anyone involved in the reporting of the results of polls and surveys to stipulate that they will only report the results and surveys conducted by organisations that are members of the BPC.

In particular, it should be noted that only organisations conducting social or political surveys are eligible for BPC membership, and, consequently, the vast majority of organisations conducting commercial market research surveys are not eligible for BPC membership.

The post British Polling Council Statement on Reporting of Polls and Surveys appeared first on British Polling Council.

You can read the British Polling Council’s submission here

The post Consultation on the future of population and migration statistics in England and Wales appeared first on British Polling Council.