Pre-Election Period: Can You Still Run a Public Consultation?

We published an earlier version of this article in 2019 under the title “Will purdah affect your consultation?” The underlying legal position has not changed. The terminology has. With local elections in May 2026 approaching, this is a good moment to update both.

---

What has changed, and why does the name matter?

The word “purdah” is no longer used in official guidance. The House of Commons Library describes it as a term that is “generally no longer used” and notes that public bodies and departments have moved to “pre-election period” or “period of heightened sensitivity” instead. NHS England’s guidance for the 2024 general election referred explicitly to “the pre-election period, previously referred to as ‘purdah’.” The Cabinet Office guidance issued for the July 2024 general election followed the same convention.

The reason for the change is straightforward. The word “purdah” derives from Urdu and Persian and refers literally to the practice of secluding women from public life. Using it as shorthand for a period of civil service restraint was always uncomfortable, and it is now broadly considered inappropriate. Some practitioners still use it informally. Official guidance no longer does, and tCI does not recommend it.

The substance of what the period requires has not moved. What has changed is the language you should use when discussing it with colleagues, commissioners and legal advisers. If your consultation plan still refers to “purdah,” update it.

What does the pre-election period actually restrict?

The pre-election period is the interval between the formal announcement of an election and the formation of a new government. For general elections it has typically run for five to six weeks. For local elections, it begins when the notice of election is published, usually around six weeks before polling day.

The core principle is that public bodies should not take actions, make announcements, or run communications that could advantage any candidate or party. The Cabinet Office guidance for the 2024 general election set out the standard expectations: avoiding official support for announcements that might influence the election outcome, not using public resources for party-political purposes, and handling information requests from different parties evenly.

For consultations, the practical implication is this. Central government guidance has consistently advised postponing non-essential new consultations during the pre-election period, while permitting consultations already underway to continue, subject to a ban on new publicity. Where a consultation is paused, the period can be extended afterwards to compensate, or additional publicity provided once the election is over. Neither of those remedies is ideal, but both are available.

What cannot happen is that a public body simply abandons a running consultation because an election has been called, without any plan to resume or extend it. Consultees who have already responded are entitled to expect that their responses will be considered. That obligation does not evaporate during an election campaign.

Does the pre-election period override legal duties? No.

This is the point that still catches organisations out, and it was addressed directly by the courts in 2017. In R (ex parte ClientEarth) v Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs [2017] EWHC B12 (Admin), the government had sought to delay publication of its Air Quality Plan on the grounds that pre-election restrictions applied. Mr Justice Garnham was clear: the pre-election period is not a rule of law. It does not override statutory duties, and it does not provide ministers or public bodies with a defence against proceedings in public or private law.

The judge described the pre-election period as “a self-denying ordinance imposed by local or central government on its officers and members.” Courts are not bound by it. It carries moral authority and practical weight, but where a statutory duty requires something to be done, the fact that an election is approaching does not excuse the failure to do it. The duty continues.

The Air Quality case also established something useful about proportionality. The court allowed a short delay until after local elections, because newly elected councillors were key consultees and giving them time to consider their position was reasonable. It refused to allow a further delay over the general election. The question in each case is whether the delay serves a legitimate purpose, or whether, as the judge observed, it provides a convenient excuse to defer something contentious.

We have seen that pattern before. A politically sensitive consultation, a forthcoming election, and a public body discovering that the timing is unfortunate. Courts look at the substance of those decisions, not just the form. Where delay appears self-serving rather than principled, it is unlikely to be treated sympathetically.

What should you do in practice before May 2026?

With local elections coming in May 2026, public bodies running or planning consultations should be considering this now. NHS England has noted that the latest date the pre-election period could begin in local areas where there are elections is 31 March 2026 NHS England, though in practice the exact start date depends on when the relevant authority formally declares the election.

Three things are worth checking. First, does your timetable take the pre-election period into account? A consultation that is designed to close in late April, with a decision to follow shortly afterwards, may be running into difficulty. Either the decision needs to be made before the period begins, the consultation needs to close earlier, or the whole timetable needs to shift to after polling day. None of those options is comfortable, but discovering the problem in March is better than discovering it in April.

Second, if your consultation is already underway when the period begins, you can continue it. What you should avoid is new publicity that could be characterised as politically motivated. Plan the communications sequence in advance, and document the reasoning for the timing of any announcements.

Third, do not treat the pre-election period as a reason to consult less thoroughly than the Gunning principles, the legal test for fair public consultation in the UK, require. The principles demand that consultation happens while proposals are still formative, that consultees receive enough information to respond intelligently, that adequate time is given, and that responses are conscientiously considered before any decision is made. None of those requirements are suspended by a forthcoming election. An election that falls inconveniently does not convert a premature announcement into a lawful consultation.

---

How tCI Can Help

Advice and Guidance
A tCI faculty member will work alongside you to support the development of your decisions and engagement approach. We provide independent, constructive advice at critical stages, helping you strengthen stakeholder mapping, test communication strategies, and plan robust post-decision engagement. Our role is to act as a critical friend, offering practical recommendations grounded in consultation law and good practice that build confidence in your process.

Risk Assessment
Early identification of legal, political or reputational risks in your engagement approach. Using tCI’s five-risk methodology, we spot gaps before challenge arises, helping you strengthen stakeholder communication and demonstrate procedural fairness from the outset.

Executive Briefings
Concise updates for senior leaders on consultation law, engagement duties and post-decision risks. Helps boards and leadership teams make confident, defensible decisions when under pressure, with clear guidance on what good engagement looks like after difficult choices are made.

Whether you’re preparing for a high stakes service change or building defensible evidence for complex decisions, we can help.

Contact tCI: hello@consultationinstitute.org