Methodology
How we keep the data accurate
BugBen exists to make UK Parliament legible to everyone — and that only works if people can trust what they read. This page sets out, in plain terms, where our data comes from, how we keep it accurate, and the standards we hold ourselves to.
Our principles
Authoritative sources only
Every parliamentary record on BugBen is drawn directly from the official UK Parliament data services and other recognised open-data providers. We do not scrape, paraphrase, or second-guess the public record — we present it.
Verified and reconciled
Data is validated against a strict schema as it is ingested, cross-checked between sources where they overlap, and re-synchronised on a fixed schedule so what you read reflects the live state of Parliament.
Transparent and correctable
We show our working, cite our sources, and make it easy to flag anything that looks wrong. When we get something wrong, we correct it promptly and openly.
Where our data comes from
We do not generate, interpret, or alter official records. Everything you see is drawn from authoritative public sources, presented faithfully:
-
UK Parliament API
Bills, Members, divisions, and parliamentary stages — the primary system of record for everything happening in the Commons and the Lords.
-
legislation.gov.uk
The official home of UK legislation, used for the full text and enacted status of Acts of Parliament.
-
Open Parliament Licence
Parliamentary material is reproduced under the Open Parliament Licence, which governs how we may use and present official data.
How we keep it accurate
Accuracy is not a one-off check; it is a pipeline. Every record passes through the same four stages before it reaches you.
-
1
Ingest
We pull from authoritative APIs on a fixed cadence. Records are fetched in full rather than sampled, so we never present a partial picture of a bill or a member.
-
2
Validate
Each record is checked against a strict schema before it is stored. Malformed or incomplete records are rejected and logged rather than published, so a bad upstream record cannot quietly corrupt what you see.
-
3
Reconcile
Where two sources describe the same entity — for example a bill and its resulting Act — we reconcile them against a stable identifier so the same thing is never shown twice or under two conflicting statuses.
-
4
Refresh
Parliamentary data moves daily. We re-synchronise on a regular schedule and surface a clear "last updated" signal, so freshness is never left to guesswork.
Neutrality is part of the method
Data quality is not only about being factually correct — it is about being fair. We do not editorialise on bills or members, we do not assign them political scores, and we present every party and position by the same rules.
Where we summarise, we summarise neutrally and link back to the primary source so you can always read the original for yourself.
Public voting: not a representative poll
When we publish how BugBen users feel about a bill or a question of the day, that figure is a tally of whoever chose to take part — not a scientific opinion poll, and not a representative sample of the country. We do not currently weight results by age, region, past vote, or any other factor, and we never describe our figures as "representative", "nationally weighted", or "what Britain thinks".
With your consent, you can add optional demographic details to your profile — such as age band or how you voted in 2024 — so we can show honest breakdowns (for example, "how the mood differs by age band" among the people who told us). A breakdown of that sample still only tells you about BugBen's respondents, not the electorate. Every figure states its sample size (n) and time window, and where a group is too small to be meaningful we suppress or caveat it rather than publish an unreliable number. This information is collected only with your consent and handled in line with our privacy policy.
Looking ahead
Raising the bar on trustworthy numbers
We are continually strengthening the defences behind our published figures — for example, safeguards against coordinated or automated voting so our totals mean what they appear to mean. Any future move towards genuine, methodologically weighted or representative polling would need a documented, published methodology before we changed how we describe our numbers, and anything touching election periods would additionally need legal review under UK electoral law before it shipped.
We are taking this carefully and responsibly, and we will say more in due course. Our commitment is constant: clear methods, honest figures, and respect for the people who take part.
Questions about our data
- Where does BugBen get its data?
- All parliamentary information — bills, Acts, MPs, Lords, and division votes — comes directly from the official UK Parliament data services and legislation.gov.uk. We are a presentation layer over the public record; we do not author or interpret the underlying data.
- How accurate is the information on BugBen?
- Because we mirror authoritative sources rather than re-key information by hand, our records are as accurate as the official public record they are drawn from. We validate every record against a strict schema on ingestion and reconcile overlapping sources, which removes the most common causes of error — typos, duplication, and stale status.
- How often is the data updated?
- Parliamentary data is re-synchronised on a regular, automated schedule throughout the day. Each page reflects the most recent successful synchronisation, and the underlying records carry the dates published by Parliament itself.
- Does BugBen editorialise or take a political position?
- No. BugBen is non-partisan by design. We do not editorialise on bills, members, or votes, and we do not rank or score them by any political measure. Our goal is informed citizens, not directed ones.
- Are BugBen's voting figures a representative poll?
- No. BugBen vote and Mood Index totals are a tally of whoever chose to take part — not a weighted or nationally representative sample. We do not apply any weighting methodology today, and we never describe these figures as "representative", "nationally weighted", or "what Britain thinks". We do collect optional demographic details (with your consent) so we can show breakdowns — for example, the mood by age band — but a breakdown of BugBen respondents still only describes BugBen respondents, not a scientific poll.
- What happens if something is wrong?
- We treat corrections as a priority. If you spot an error, contact us at [email protected]. Where the issue originates upstream in an official source, we flag it and update as soon as the corrected record is published.
Spotted something wrong?
We treat corrections as a priority. If a record looks inaccurate or out of date, tell us and we will investigate promptly.