Introduction | FAQ | National Policy Committee | Scottish Policy Committee

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: Is there room for another party?
A: Most fringe parties will never break through but we are seeking to build a party that will become a viable force in British politics. There is room for us because our ideas challenge the opportunism of the main parties and concentrate on the real long-term issues that face us.

Q: Will you not be splitting the vote for one of the major parties?
A: No party owns the electorate. By offering competition with alternative ideas we are simply giving voters a choice. If the voters do not support us then we will not be significant enough to 'split the vote'. If, on the other hand, we do attract significant support, it will be clear that voters are not happy with the performance of the major parties and will be exercising their right to go elsewhere. We cannot continually accept whatever the major parties happen to offer for fear of splitting the vote, especially as the major parties now seem to be offering remarkably similar (and in or view profoundly misguided) policies.  At present our intention, in any case, is only to stand in local elections and offer our alternative platform there, which may be an opportunity for one or more of the major parties to take up our message.

Q: Why don't you enter into an alliance with one or more of the other small parties?
A: First, if we thought that there were other viable parties in existence that represented our philosophy and policies then we would have no need to organise separately.  We believe that we offer a distinctive platform in British politics today.  Second, we are not concerned with the supposed problem of 'vote-splitting' in the event that we do share any common ground with other parties, since competition is a means to weed out 'no-hopers' and make potentially successful parties stronger.  'Vote-splitting' is in any case a presumptuous idea that parties own voters and can deliver votes to whomsoever they choose, an idea that is very far from reality.  Third, we reject the extremes of the far right and far left, which accounts for most of the small parties.

Q: When did a party such as this ever get into power?
A: There have been a good number of examples of minority parties coming to power in other countries although it has yet to happen in Britain. However, it is clear that the majority of the electorate are now critical of our current politicians and would seriously consider a change. At present we are seeking to build a grassroots movement through local activity, but we do believe that there is a desire for change nationally too.  Patient grassroots work will help to bring this about.

Q: Will you be standing candidates in forthcoming elections?
A: We seek to build a grassroots coalition of progressive ideas by supporting candidates at mainly local elections, including independent candidates.  We have so far had a small number of candidates in local authority elections with encouraging results. We intend to build on this in future elections and gradually increase the number of candidates..

Q: Do you have the backing of any recognised politicians?
A: There are no well-known politicians involved with our party. We are determined to provide a new style of politics and it is most unlikely that the party will ever contain more than a small percentage of our present day MPs. We intend to change the political landscape and although we recognise that there are a number of sincere, intelligent and principled politicians at Westminster, we intend to get as many of our candidates as possible from outside politics, people with proven management skills and wide experience of real life situations.

Q: Are there any big names from the business world?
A: There are a good number of business people showing interest and we have had supportive comments from figures such as Sir John Harvey-Jones. However we would appear to be attracting more attention from the SME sector (small to medium size enterprises). A lot of the bigger players have the means to shield themselves from the breakdown in our society and thus it does not appear to concern them as much.

Q: What is your core philosophy?
A: In terms of political philosophy, we are a liberal, progressive and non-socialist party.  We believe that maximising individual responsibility is the best way to ensure personal freedom and initiative but that society must provide safeguards for those who suffer excessive hardship. We believe that government should not become too involved either in commercial activity or in dictating how people should organise their personal lives. We also believe that the values of freedom, democracy and human rights should be pursued at home and abroad.  Overall, we describe ourselves as a party of economic liberalism, political reform and internationalism.

Q: Are you on the left or the right of the political spectrum?
A: We are a party of the progressive centre.  Our liberal and progressive philosophy differs from extreme individualism on the one hand and extreme collectivism on the other.  Liberalism, properly understood, embodies a strong idea of social progress and the need in society to make moral distinctions (thus should not be confused with what is sometimes called libertarianism, or libertinism).  Progressivism suggests the drive to promote freedom, democracy and human rights as universal rather than as culturally relative values.

Q: Why do you reject nationalism?
A: We believe that liberal and progressive values can and should be applicable for everyone, regardless of nationality.  Besides, in a globalised economy we need to be able to engage with the wider world and not lock ourselves into a narrow isolationist or protectionist stance.  For these reasons we reject any calls for co-operation with other parties on any sort of 'nationalist' platform, as we explain here.

Q: What is the party setting out to achieve?
A: We are committed to do a number of things.

• We wish to give the electorate a serious choice that is not confined to the narrow agendas of Left and Right. We will take the worthwhile ideas of the left such as assisting those in poverty, affordable housing, better healthcare and education etc and combine it with the resource management skills of the right to produce policies which will actually work for a change.
• We are not in the business of criticising existing politicians; we hope to provide a locus where the best minds from all sides of the political debate can work together
• We intend to concentrate on the root causes and not simply symptoms. For example we believe that the best long term cure for crime is not simply more policemen on the beat but to make sure that as many people as possible leave school with a decent education and / or employable skills.

Q: Why can’t the existing parties carry out your policies?
A: The existing mainstream parties all offer short-term fixes, not long-term solutions. We have a platform that is radical, distinctive and innovative, based upon a coherent philosophy and a hard-headed realism about the sorts of issues that confront us and the policies that can tackle them.  The major parties are all clustered around a social democratic consensus and will refuse to change until it is too late - possibly until some crisis erupts to threaten their time in office.  The minor parties are often single issue campaigns or otherwise adopt extremist and impractical positions.  A few try to be all things to all people, not even identifying the real issues let alone tackling them.  By contrast, we offer a clear diagnosis and long-term policy solutions without recourse to extremism or spin.

Q: Are you going to pay for your reforms by bleeding funds from the welfare system?
A: We must first of all accept that current levels of spending in the welfare sector simply cannot continue. We spend £2,200 million pounds every week on the various forms of welfare which is the same as we spend on the NHS and education combined.  This is a frightening statistic. What many people do not seem to realise that by milking the welfare system they are acting very selfishly and they are depriving others of scarce resources. Our policies are most certainly geared towards bringing the welfare system under control as we simply must face up to reality on this issue before it ruins our economy. Anyone in genuine need will still be properly looked after but it is quite obvious that no party can hope to improve our economy without tackling a welfare state which is haemorrhaging cash as fast as we pour it in.

Q: Are you a breakaway splinter from any other political party?
A: Not at all. We have no connection with any of the existing parties and our members come from across the political spectrum.

Q: What about proportional representation?
A: Although as a small party we might be expected to support proportional representation, since it would offer us more opportunity to get elected, we actually oppose it for several reasons. There are many examples across Europe where proportional representation has effectively created a permanent coalition of the political elite that has no reference back to voters. Elections then become no longer about standing on a manifesto and being accountable, since the first act after an election is to trade away elements of the manifesto in order to form a coalition. A more proportional system of representation in parliament provides less, rather than more, accountability. Proportional representation almost guarantees that any leverage the electors have will be dissipated. It is politics for those who prefer abstract principles to hard reality.