How candidates found the May 2026 elections in England

We will continue to support candidates to comply with requirements

It is important candidates can campaign with confidence and understand the spending laws and their reporting requirements. Ahead of the May 2026 elections, we ran webinars and advice surgeries to ensure candidates could access support in a way that works for them. We also provided additional and targeted support on election spending returns. We trialled new, user-friendly candidate spending returns to address common issues and feedback from previous elections.  

We will continue to look at ways to support candidates. However, the design, format and content of some forms is set out in law which dates back decades, which limits our ability to make them easier to understand and complete. Increasing the flexibility of the process to amend forms would better support the diverse range of candidates who stand for election.

We also provided support on imprint requirements. Under the law, some campaign material must contain details to show who is responsible for the material. An imprint informs voters who the material is being promoted by and on whose behalf.

Ahead of these elections, we received 345 reports of missing imprints on campaign materials. This was an increase from the same period ahead of the May 2025 elections. For many of these campaign materials the original source was clear for voters, as an imprint was visible within one click of the material.  

There were some materials where the imprint was missing entirely. In these cases, we contacted the promoter with advice to help them comply and restore transparency for voters. We only took enforcement action in cases of repeated breaches or a serious failure of transparency.

Ahead of future elections, we will continue to make sure the source of campaign material is clear to voters

Candidates increasingly see abuse and intimidation as a problem

We asked candidates if they had experienced problems with harassment, intimidation, or threats, and 40% of respondents said yes. This is an increase from 34% in 2025.

When asked to rate the problem that they experienced with harassment, intimidation or threats on a scale of one to five, candidate perceptions of how much of a problem they experienced has increased over recent local elections.

Our survey also asked how often they had experienced a list of scenarios including social media harassment, physical abuse, and threatening behaviour. We found that:

• 64% experienced at least one form of abuse during the campaign
• inappropriate contact through social media was the most frequently experienced scenario, with 39% experiencing it at least once, and 12% experiencing it ten or more times
• 23% experienced people spreading misleading information about them
• 21% experienced unwanted approaches in person
• 20% were personally belittled or insulted
• only 15% reported experiences of abuse or intimidation to the police

The campaign was rather toxic. With many [rival party] members spreading misinformation about myself and my campaign online. In person, I was verbally harassed by a supporter of the [rival party] at a local event I attended. This makes being a young woman in politics feel particularly precarious. 

The behaviour that made campaigning most difficult was people verbally abusing us in the street, following us down the street, or pulling their cars up to abuse us.

Someone attempted to attack me when I visited their property. Initially went to throw a punch at me, then spat at me which I moved out of the way. After this continued a barrage of verbal abuse even as I walked away down the road. 

Our results found candidates who were female, from an ethnic minority background or had a disability were more likely to experience abuse and intimidation.

We are working to agree on what is considered acceptable behaviour for campaigners

The Speaker’s Conference recommended a code of conduct for all candidates, MPs and parties to guide behaviours and language when campaigning.

Ahead of these elections we published principles to guide campaigning, with a focus on maintaining respect, safety and honesty during debate.

The principles set a minimum standard of behaviour for all candidates and campaigners. For example, the principles outline that candidates, parties and campaigners:

• should communicate respectfully when debating and disagreeing, both online and offline
• should focus their campaigns on policies and issues, not personal attacks
• should not support or amplify any form or threat of violence, harassment or incitement to public unrest
• should not use or amplify information which is false or could mislead voters

The principles are intended as guidance rather than rules that campaigners are legally required to follow. They set out good practice for these elections, building on common themes across parties’ existing codes of conduct. We are now reviewing how the principles worked in practice.  

Using these findings, we will expand the principles into a non-statutory code of conduct for future elections, in discussion with political parties. This will build on the existing codes of conduct for campaigners that have been developed in consultation with political parties.

We need to work together to address abuse and intimidation

We will continue to work with partners to tackle abuse and intimidation, including by progressing our work on the code of conduct for campaigning, and on voter education and engagement. We will continue to support work led by the Home Office, the Defending Democracy Taskforce and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, the police, and the Scottish Parliament and Senedd.  

But there is also more that political parties, social media companies and the UK government should do to improve protections for candidates.