A new Centre party?

I agree whitewave and the best way that can be achieved is for parties to work together for the common good.

This whole awful referendum fiasco need never have happened had it not been for ambitious and unscrupulous politicians in the Tory party working to promote their own interests, not the even interests of their paty let alone the interests of the country.

Centre party sounds good kitty
But would they leave their ego at home?
Unfortunatly I don't think that it would work.

www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2016/06/26/is-a-new-centre-party-on-the-cards/

Giles Fraser has just said we need a government of national unity.

The UPKIP spokesman in QT has just said the government should now be a Brexit government ,

There was a centre party for years. It was New Labour, the Blairites.

Yes, Paul Nuttall, MEP for the North West, elected by lots of people who do not know they elected MEPs. He's a very nasty man.

We had a brilliant MEP for twenty years, Graham Watson, who did more for our region than the rest of the MEPs put together.

He was also for five years the elected leader of the Europaean Liberals, quite a significant group in the EU parliament. Graham is fluent in several Europaean languages and an excellent speaker and debater.

I once asked him why he had never appeared on Question Time and he said MEPs were never invited to appear on QT - except Nigel Farage.

During the time Graham was working hard for us in the EU and Nigel Farage was picking up his pay and expenses for doing damn all, Farage appeared on Question Time 27 times.

The BBC loves controversy, is not interested in consensus and sees politics as a branch of entertainment. If the BBC did not actually create Nigel Farage, they certainly promoted him and should have some responsibility for his part in the destruction of this country.

Coalitions of all or the major parties work in times of war, but will never work at any other time. Such groupings are inherently undemocratic and need the external threat of something as terrible as a war to hold together.

A coalition of Labour, Greens etc etc wouldn't work either. Have a look at the problems Israel has where they seem permanently to be governed by a coalitions of multiple small and fissiparous parties, which constantly argue fall out and walk in and out of opposition and government.

More than 5000 people have joined the LibDems in the last few days because of Tim Farron's strong pro-EU stance

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/liberal-democrats-win-over-5000-new-members-with-pledge-to-fight-brexit-a7104841.html

www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/29/leave-donor-plans-new-party-to-replace-ukip-without-farage

I read about this a few weeks ago, before the outcome of the referendum was known. It will be interesting to see what his main attraction will be without UKIP's main justification for existence, so the sting will be taken out of its tail. It will be a far right party and I wonder if Labour voters will find it appealing. Somehow I doubt it, because he won't deliver what disenchanted Labour supporters want.

@Monica

Germany has had coalition governments since the end of WW2. Merkel herself is currently the leader of a CDU/CSU/SPD coalition. Germany isn't doing too badly and their politicians seem to behave like mature adults.

Both the Labour and Conservative Parties in the UK have been an alliance of different political viewpoints.

PS. Should also have written that PR (or AV) would probably see the resurgence of the LibDems. I, for one, would be happy with a Labour/LibDem/Green alliance, because they all have something I could support.

On another thread I just posted that I supported electoral reform such as replacing the first past the post system with the Single Transferable Vote (STV) or Alternative Vote (AV) I because I would like to see some of the smaller parties grow.

I don't think the current two party system is good for the UK. Other countries manage with coalitions and we might see so real change if there was a coalition of certain parties, or a breakaway new party. It pains me to say that as a life long Labour voter, the party needs to get its act together. I definitely think there's a place now for a new party.

It could be very effective as we go forward into the uncharted waters we now face.

daphne I would support that alliance too.

Well something has to happen - we cant go on as we are.

I cannot envisage a Labour/LibDem/Green alliance. Any superficial similarity between their aims is rent asunder by their entirely different approaches to solving these common problems that arise from the highly divergent underlying philosophies.

The in-fighting that would follow such a re-alignment would make the current shenanigans in the labour party look like a toddler's tantrum.

I can, however, see an alighment between more right wing disenchanted labour MP's and the LibDems, similar to the merging with the SDP, and I suspect it will only arise by the formation, first of a party which is a version of New Labour, which then allies its self to them.

But what we do not want above all else is a sort of Blairite party.

And this is what we will get if some labour MP's form a new party Luckygirl

"I supported electoral reform such as replacing the first past the post system with the Single Transferable Vote (STV) or Alternative Vote (AV) I because I would like to see some of the smaller parties grow."

That was another referendum lost to lies: "PR isn't fair because some peoples votes are counted twice and others aren't."

Why is it that when a referendum doesn't go the way certain people want, it 'isnt fair' If that same referendum were to go the way certain people want, with exactly the same reversed result, then it's perfectly fair!!!!! How curious is that?!!!!

Niggle, could it be because of the blatant lies put forward to gain votes?

Ahem! I thought this thread was about the formation of a centrist party, not another opportunity to have a moan about the referendum.

Governments, however made up, should act in the interests of the most number of people and should, logically, end up as centrist. Whenever a government makes a decision, it will inevitably disadvantage one group. What we've seen, particularly over the last six years, is the same groups of people advantaged and disadvantaged to the extent that the disadvantaged have had enough.

Unfortunately governments don't act in the long-term interest of the country (ie society as a whole), because they're more interested in buying votes from their supporters or those they would like to persuade to support them.

I have found that voters in some other countries are more aware of the interests of the country and political processes. They are more prepared to accept compromises rather than only want what's in it for them.

When casting a single vote in a general election, we are accepting a whole package of policies and, therefore, making compromises. FPTP forces tactical voting on some people, because they opt for the best of two evils. I have never ever agreed with any single party on everything and my vote has never counted anyway. I guess there are many millions of people in the same situation. Democracy as most people seem to understand it is an illusion.

In my ideal scifi world, we would be presented with a list of issues (the economy, ways of financing the NHS, aims of education, laws, need for investment, etc) and we would vote on a scale of 1 to 10. People would need to be informed about consequences from reliable sources. The results would be collated and the government's role would be to balance all the various opinions. There would also need to be safety nets to protect minorities and to ensure the law is upheld. There would be no need for political parties.