Time for a new party? No more Tories or Labour?

[SirGalahad]

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...rested-in-new-anti-brexit-party-james-chapman

It seems both parties have divisions, those who support Brexit and those against. However will it be enough to create a new party or will we have a return to three party politics?

Brexit is the defining issue of our times.

 

[JohnD]

the idea has been floated by a Tory insider.

rumour has it his objective is to prevent Corbyn getting into power by splitting the under-65 vote.

 

[motorbiking]

No reason we can't have an opposing party to Ukip, but I see too problems:

1 It will probably be a done thing by the time it gets a chance to stand and it will be a well and truly done thing by the time they get any volume of MPs.

2 Single agenda parties don't tend to do very well. Greens, Ukip and even the SNP. to some extent

They could merge with the matching cardigan party (lib dems) though doubt they would then appeal to anyone.

 

[Brigade77]

If you could cut through the warped distortions of post WWII history, then the National Socialists had some very good policies, which if incorporated into comrade Corbyns vision of a socialist utopia . . . might actually make the world a better place for the moderate centre.

 

[motorbiking]

example?

 

[tony1851]

A centre party - or a one-issue party for that matter - never does well in the UK.
Remember the SDP in the 1980s, and UKIP now.

And if you want a pro-Brexit party, look to the Liberals; they didn't do too well, so perhaps the electorate were telling them something.

 

[Notch7]

All the time there is first past the post, this country will probably keep 2 party politics.

I dont know enough about merits of alternative systems but maybe its time for a change.

 

[EFLImpudence]

Have you forgotten that both major parties had a majority of M.P.s who were anti-brexit before the referendum?

The Conservatives by 218:10, Labour by 185:138

403 M.P.s are therefore supporting that which they believe detrimental to the country - or they were before.
Of course they are such strong believers in democracy that ditching their principles is secondary.

Some of them are going against the views of (the majority of) their own constituents who agreed with them and voted to remain.

 

[Notch7]

Have you forgotten that both major parties had a majority of M.P.s who were anti-brexit before the referendum?

The Conservatives by 218:10, Labour by 185:138

403 M.P.s are therefore supporting that which they believe detrimental to the country - or they were before.
Of course they are such strong believers in democracy that ditching their principles is secondary.

Some of them are going against the views of (the majority of) their own constituents who agreed with them and voted to remain.

Of course the political class would naturally be pro remain.

 

[EFLImpudence]

They're not now.

 

[Doggit]

Have you forgotten that both major parties had a majority of M.P.s who were anti-brexit before the referendum?

The Conservatives by 218:10, Labour by 185:138

403 M.P.s are therefore supporting that which they believe detrimental to the country - or they were before.
Of course they are such strong believers in democracy that ditching their principles is secondary.

Some of them are going against the views of (the majority of) their own constituents who agreed with them and voted to remain.

Most MPs wanted the status quo, as in most people think they know what they like, whereas in truth, the like what they know. And therein lies the conundrum of democracy, do they follow their concience, or, being the representative of their consituants, do they follow the result of the referendum. Democracy doesn't allow them to follow the will of the constituants that wanted to remain, as they lost out to the greater number that voted for Brexit, however slim the difference was.

Thse like David Lammy who said they should ignore the referendum result, effectively denied democracy, and showed an arrogance that was simply astounding. And Chapman isn't offering a new party, he's only trying to prevent Brexit. If the dissafeced Labour MP who don't like Corbyn joined with the Lib Dems, at least that would be the start of a new party, but as the Lib Dems acieved very little, I doubt any would actualy join up, and I doubt if any conservatives will have the courage to either, as it comes down to prefering to be a little fish in a big pond, because it's safer being there.

 

[transam]

imho it should be compulsory to vote in general election.

non compliance would mean a massive fine

 

[EFLImpudence]

or, being the representative of their consituants,

Yes, representatives; NOT delegates.

do they follow the result of the referendum. Democracy doesn't allow them to follow the will of the constituants that wanted to remain, as they lost out to the greater number that voted for Brexit, however slim the difference was.

Their duty is to do what they think best for the country.
As that was to remain the day before the referendum, we can only assume that was still the case the day after.
There was no stigma in being against the EU before the referendum if that was their belief.

Thse like David Lammy who said they should ignore the referendum result, effectively denied democracy, and showed an arrogance that was simply astounding.

No, it wasn't. That is his duty.

 

[Doggit]

You get fined $20 in Australia for not voting in an election, but I expect it costs more than that to collect.

 

[Doggit]

Their duty is to do what they think best for the country.

Yes, but they can't use that as an excuse to go against the referendum.

And under no circumstances will I accept that it was Lammys duty to go against the result; that makes a complete mockery of a democracy. Ireland voted against the Lisbon treaty in 2008, and because the Irish government didn't like the result, they ignored it, and held another one in 2009. Once the government starts ignoring it's people, then it's the start of becoming an autocracy, and then they start doing away with elections; what's the point of having an election if the government isn't going to listen to the choice the people make.