Debates between candidates in Mayoral Elections and other individual election areas

Judgements around how best to include candidates in any proposed debate in an individual electoral area – such as a mayoral contest, or in a single parliamentary constituency - are based on the BBC's election guidelines; these include the requirements of Ofcom (the BBC’s regulator) and may be found in the relevant election guidelines.  Election Guidelines are produced for every General Election and each set of elections which usually take place in May each year. They can be found archived here on the Editorial Policy website. 

Editorial judgement lies at the heart of any decision which involves giving some candidates more coverage than others - but that must take into account an objective look at the past and current electoral support of parties and candidates in each area. So those with a record of some support, especially in previous equivalent elections, may often be given more time and prominence than those who have not attracted electoral support before. However, opinion polls, indicating more current support, can also be a factor - the BBC's Editorial Guidelines say that "the findings of voting intention polls must be reported in the context of trend", so where a party or candidate has established a robust and consistent trend of such support, that too will be taken into account. It should be noted that polling of individual constituencies, or limited geographical areas, is normally regarded as less reliable than more general national polling.

One important reason for having debates is that voters have the opportunity to question and scrutinise those who could be in power and help hold them to account for what they intend to do with that power. A debate involving all the candidates equally, where that could mean a large number of participants competing for time and attention, may result in less opportunity to hear sufficiently from those candidates more likely to win and exercise political power.

There may be other relevant factors too; sometimes, a candidate with less evidence of electoral support might stand for office to draw attention to a particular cause, or may only propose policies which have limited or no relevance to the post they are contesting. These may include “significant views and perspectives” which could justify full participation in a debate, but if not, it is important that broadcasters still give such candidates some appropriate coverage, which is linked to the debate to ensure that the audience is given some information about all candidates.

So involvement in debates (and other election output) is proportionate - in other words, when candidates or their party have a track record of past and/or current support in that electoral area, they are more likely to take part fully in debates. Others, with less evidence of support, may still have involvement, for example, a short pre-recorded statement, an interview, or participation in a linked programme; the minimum level of coverage for other candidates, where a debate is taking place, is for the full list of candidates to be shown or read out, in addition to any reference to the online list of candidates standing. It may also involve signposting the audience to other programmes or places online (or plans for such content) where they will be able to find out more about all of the candidates.

Editors should try to make fair judgements, mindful of the BBC's obligations of due impartiality and in the best interests of voters as a whole. Advice is available to make sure those decisions are taken with appropriate consistency and are taking into account all appropriate factors, such as those mentioned above. They will also need to consider any further relevant evidence which may emerge during the campaign. Candidates who feel they are not being treated fairly can, of course, bring forward evidence of support to challenge such judgements and - if necessary - use the formal process to complain. In the context of an election, that process is likely to be expedited (ie concluded before polling day). It is advisable, therefore, that all candidates are kept informed about important programme plans, such as set-piece debates, so that any complaints can be considered in a timely way.

This guidance is specifically for debates involving candidates in individual electoral areas, not necessarily more general debates, such as leader debates, debates across multiple electoral areas, or debates not involving candidates.