General elections survey: PP, Vox, and SALF gather 52% of the vote, according to 40dB

The “housing decrees” in the study are the Royal Decree-Laws 26/2026 and 27/2026, approved by the Council of Ministers on September 29, 2026, and published in the BOE on September 30 and October 1 respectively. Their objective was, among others, to strengthen the social function of housing, expand the affordable housing supply, and provide greater stability to regular rental contracts.^[2]

From a formal point of view, the parliamentary itinerary of any royal decree-law is clear: the Government approves it for reasons of extraordinary and urgent necessity, it comes into force after its publication in the BOE, and within a maximum period of 30 days, the Congress must debate it and decide whether to validate it (keep it in force) or repeal it (nullify it). Additionally, the Congress may agree that the same text be processed as a bill, opening a subsequent process of amendments, committee work, and a new final vote.^[2][4][5]

In this case, the Congress convened an extraordinary Plenary session on Friday, October 2, 2026 with a single item on the agenda: the validation or repeal of the two royal decree-laws on housing. The agenda itself details that it was about:

• Royal Decree-Law 26/2026, of September 29, on urgent measures for the protection of the social function of housing and the expansion of affordable housing supply (file 130/000055).^[2]
• Royal Decree-Law 27/2026, of September 29, on urgent measures to reinforce the stability of regular housing lease contracts (file 130/000056).^[2]

Before the vote, both the Government and the sponsoring groups (PSOE and Sumar) proposed as “next steps” the validation in the Plenary and, in parallel, the possibility that one of the decrees be sent as an express bill to introduce corrections via amendments. The Minister of Housing herself even offered Junts to process the decree as a bill “with speed” to incorporate their demands during the parliamentary process.^[220001.0]

However, the sequence was resolved differently: according to information gathered from general and specialized press searches, the Congress rejected both decrees in the session of October 2, with negative votes preventing their validation (for example, 172 votes in favor and 178 against in one of the texts, and 166 in favor versus 184 against in the other).^{[1][7][10][11][14]} This means that:

• They have not been validated, so they lose their validity as royal decree-laws.
• Automatic processing as a bill is not opened either, because this decision precisely requires the Plenary's approval at the time of validation.

Consequently, strictly speaking, there are no longer “next parliamentary steps” for the approval of those two specific decrees: their path as decree-laws has ended with parliamentary repeal. The Senate does not intervene at this stage; all decisions about validation or repeal fall to the Congress of Deputies.^[2][7][10]

What can happen instead are new legislative initiatives that fully or partially incorporate the content of the repealed decrees. From now on, if the Government wants to recover those housing measures, the options include:

• Presenting a new ordinary bill or a series of sectoral bills (for example, on evictions, rentals, or public housing), which would follow the common legislative procedure: consideration, amendments, committee, Congress Plenary, Senate passage, and final approval.
• Trying to rebuild a majority and reconsider a new royal decree-law on housing, again assuming the risk of validation but incorporating negotiated changes with the groups that voted against.
• Promoting partial reforms through other laws in process, incorporating amendments that reintroduce some of the measures planned in the repealed decrees.

That is, from the study's perspective, the “next steps” are no longer the natural approval phase of those decrees, but the reconfiguration of the legislative strategy on housing: new rules, new negotiations, and eventually a new parliamentary calendar to try to get similar measures approved as stable law.

According to the current Statutes of the Popular Party (reformed and approved at the XXI National Congress of 2025), the National President of the Popular Party is the highest authority of the party and concentrates key functions of representation, political leadership, leadership team configuration, coordination of discourse, and internal discipline. These competencies are mainly set out in Article 44 of the Statutes, complemented by other provisions on bodies and appointments.

1. Highest representation and presidency of bodies

Article 44.1 establishes, first, that the national president holds the political and legal representation of the Popular Party. This implies that:

• He acts as the main spokesperson and public face of the PP before institutions, other parties, and public opinion.
• He can represent the party in acts and legal relations requiring formal representation.
• He presides over the National Board of Directors and the National Executive Committee, that is, the main governing bodies between congresses.
• In those bodies, he has a in case of a tie, allowing him to break internal balances in key decisions.

This dual role – external representation and internal presidency – places the president at the apex both organically and politically of the party.

2. Execution of agreements and political leadership

Another central function, also foreseen in Article 44.1, consists of promoting and executing the agreements adopted by:

• The National Congress of the PP.
• The National Board of Directors and the National Executive Committee.

In practice, this makes the president the ultimate responsible for the political line approved in congresses and collegiate bodies, and the one who must translate strategic decisions into organization, messages, alliances, and opposition to the Government.

3. Appointments and leadership configuration

The Statutes attribute to the president a decisive power in forming the leadership team. Article 44.1 c) and d) recognize his faculty to:

• Propose to the Executive Committee the appointment of the Secretary General, the General Coordinator (if any), the Vice Secretaries, Coordinators, Secretaries, and the Director General of Finance and Organization.
• Also propose the people who will integrate internal bodies such as the National Electoral Committee, the Committee of Rights and Guarantees, and the Membership Committee.

Although formally these appointments are agreed upon by the Executive Committee, the fact that they originate from the president's proposal grants him decisive capacity to shape his team and align internal bodies with his political project.

4. Coordination of political action and discourse control

Another relevant competence included in the statutes (art. 44.1 e)) is to coordinate the political action of the Popular Party. This includes:

• Setting the main lines of opposition or support to the Government.
• Defining the strategy for elections, pacts, and parliamentary negotiations.
• Ensuring that the different bodies, spokespersons, and territorial structures maintain a coherent message with the national leadership.

The statutes add that the president must authorize statements made on behalf of the party or that could politically compromise it, which gives him effective control over the official discourse of the PP.

5. Internal discipline and proceedings

Regarding discipline, Article 44.1 f) allows the president to:

• Order the opening of disciplinary proceedings against members.
• Decree the provisional suspension of a member from all party responsibilities while the proceeding is processed.

These powers are exercised in coordination with the Committee of Rights and Guarantees, which is the body guaranteeing the procedure, but they reinforce the president's role as guarantor of the public image and internal integrity of the organization.

6. Exceptional powers in urgent situations

Finally, Article 44.2 provides that, in case of urgent necessity, the national president may temporarily assume competencies of other collegiate bodies, provided that:

• The measure is proportionate to the situation.
• It is subsequently submitted to knowledge and possible ratification by the Executive Committee or the National Board of Directors.

This clause grants the president extraordinary maneuvering room in the face of internal or external crises requiring quick responses, while preserving some subsequent control by collegiate bodies.

Overall, the Statutes of the Popular Party configure its national president as a figure with a very high concentration of organic and political power: he directs strategy, proposes the leadership team, controls the message, promotes the execution of agreements, and can intervene in discipline and emergencies, always within the statutory framework and with the counterbalance of congresses and collegiate bodies.

In Spain, there is no closed legal definition of a “representative survey” with a mandatory minimum sample size or a specific method imposed by law. What does exist are very precise legal requirements for the conduct and publication of electoral polls, especially during the electoral period, and a series of technical criteria that, in practice, determine whether a survey can be considered methodologically sound and, therefore, representative.

1. Basic legal framework: LOREG and Central Electoral Board

The main regulatory framework is the Organic Law 5/1985, of the General Electoral Regime (LOREG), particularly its Article 69, which regulates the regime for publishing electoral surveys during campaigns. Added to this are the instructions of the Central Electoral Board (JEC), including Instruction 1/2024 on voting intention surveys conducted by public bodies during the electoral period.

According to Article 69 LOREG, between the call and the holding of elections, any publication of polls or electoral surveys must comply with the following transparency requirements:

• Identification of the responsible party: the name and address of the organization, entity (public or private), or individual who conducted the poll, as well as who commissioned it, must be indicated.
• Minimum technical sheet, which must include at least:
  • Sampling system used.
  • Sample size.
  • Margin of error of the sample.
  • Level of representativeness (usually, confidence level).
  • Selection procedure of the surveyed individuals.
  • Dates of fieldwork.
• Questionnaire: the full text of the questions and the number of people who did not answer each question must be published.

The JEC, according to Article 69, supervises that the data do not contain falsifications, concealments, or deliberate manipulations and may require additional technical information from the pollster.

Additionally, the law establishes an absolute prohibition on publishing or disseminating electoral surveys during the five days prior to voting. Failure to comply with these obligations may lead to mandatory corrections and sanctions.

2. Surveys conducted by public bodies

Article 69.8 LOREG and JEC Instruction 1/2024 regulate voting intention surveys conducted by bodies dependent on Public Administrations (for example, CIS, CEO, or regional centers).

During the electoral period, when a public body decides to conduct a survey with questions about voting intention or evaluation of parties or leaders:

• It must notify the JEC in advance, at least 48 hours before the start of fieldwork.
• In that notification, it must detail the technical characteristics (sampling system, expected size, margin of error, level of representativeness, selection method, survey technique, fieldwork dates and completion, planned questionnaire, etc.).
• Results must be made available to parties that request them, within a maximum of 48 hours from availability, ensuring equal access.
• Personal data protection must be respected, according to data protection regulations.

Failure to meet these conditions does not automatically mean the survey is “non-representative” statistically, but it may violate LOREG and JEC instructions and thus be irregular in its public use.

3. What is understood as “representative” from a technical perspective

Beyond the law, representativeness is a statistical concept linked to the quality of the sample design, not only to formal compliance with the technical sheet. In practice, for an electoral survey to be considered representative, it is usually required that:

• The universe is well defined (for example, population with voting rights in a specific community).
• A probabilistic sampling or at least a reasonable sample design is used (stratification by province, municipality size, sex, age, etc.).
• The sample size allows an acceptable margin of error (typically around ±3 percentage points for national results, although the law does not set a threshold).
• There are weightings and quality controls to correct deviations from the real census structure.
• The fieldwork (phone, online, face-to-face) is well described and consistent with the target population type.

These criteria are not numerically detailed in LOREG but are derived from the transparency requirements of Article 69 (especially the obligation to publish sampling system, size, margin of error, and level of representativeness) and the usual practices of bodies like CIS and professional codes in the sector.

4. Practical summary

In summary, in Spain an electoral survey is considered legally compliant and, in practice, representative when:

• It meets the transparency obligations of Article 69 LOREG (complete technical sheet and publication of questionnaire and non-responses).
• It respects the deadlines and prohibitions on publication (especially the five-day ban before voting).
• It is subject to JEC supervision, which can require clarifications and corrections.
• It relies on a technically sound sample design and sample size, allowing a reasonable margin of error and a good approximation to the real electorate.

The law mainly guarantees transparency and control; true representativeness comes from combining that legal compliance with a robust statistical methodology.