The Plan

Labour will be passive participants in this plan until such a time as they see the writing on the wall. Keir Starmer opposes electoral reform, opposes a return to the single market and customs union, and has acted with draconian impatience to left-wingers who step out of line.

The Labour leadership will no doubt believe a Labour majority will be achievable and desirable after the next election, despite promising growth while ignoring the clearest available path to growth –rejoining the European single market and customs union. Electoral reform would help enormously in negotiations with the EU, as it would provide a mechanism to prevent right-wing Brexit-supporting parties governing alone, and taking irresponsible actions which are deeply damaging to British and European interests.

The goal of this plan is to make progressive victory inevitable at the next election, with Labour as the largest party in parliament, but short of a majority. Ideally, Labour would have between 250 and 300 seats, with other progressive parties winning up to 200 more. We can force a progressive coalition government, which in turn forces through the electoral reform which makes our country safer from illegitimate right-wing rule, and the influence of the far-right in particular.

This plan requires rock-solid collaborative discipline from other progressive parties, and considerable deviation from the “way we’ve always done things”.

The Greens are absolutely key to this plan. They are the fastest growing progressive party, and have performed incredibly well at the last election, winning from Labour and the Conservatives in their target seats with thousands of votes to spare.

It is however indisputable that if the Green Party converts their support (probably at around 15-20% of voters according to polls) into actual votes at the next election, their current electoral strategy will be devastating to the progressive cause, and will likely hand victory to the Conservatives and/or Reform.

The Green Party have to be persuaded that standing everywhere is a terrible strategy, and that progressives need to concentrate their vote behind single candidates in winnable seats against the right-wing parties, as has been successfully done in France in 2024.

The Sprint for PR draft plan (we still have years to fine-tune it) has allocated the Green Party around 30 seats of Labour’s safest 100 seats (or all 100 if the suggested new parties do not emerge from Labour's ranks). These 30 seats are the seats where the Green Party vote is highest, and where we would expect all other progressive parties to stand aside to let the Greens challenge Labour.

In the other 220 (150 if no new parties emerge) Labour held or target seats in England and Wales with the lowest combined Conservative and Reform vote share - and in all Liberal Democrat targets - the Green Party would ideally not stand, and would endorse only one of the four other progressive parties.

If the parties challenging Labour in their safest 100 seats looked very likely to win these seats, then the number of seats allocated for progressive stand-asides for Labour to win could be extended to maximise progressive wins, while still ensuring a Labour majority is out of reach.

The Liberal Democrats have done very well to win the 72 seats they won in the 2024 general election. It is in the interest of progressives that they hold these seats, and win as many as is feasible from the Conservatives at the next election. The Green Party and any new progressive parties should therefore not stand candidates in at least 80 Liberal Democrat held seats and targets.

As with the Green Party, the Liberal Democrats should endorse Labour’s progressive competitor in their 100 safest seats, and should stand aside for Labour in their next 150 most likely wins (measured as the 250 seats with the lowest combined Con+Ref vote share).

Again, the Liberal Democrats can work with the other progressive parties to allow further Labour wins if progressive parties other than Labour look like being successful in the 100 most progressive seats.

Keir Starmer is not of the left of the Labour party. Some of the actions of Labour under his leadership have been seen as hostile to the left of the Labour party. 7 left-wingers are currently suspended from the parliamentary party for taking a stand on a measure to alleviate child poverty.

The prospects for left-wing members and suspended members of Labour’s parliamentary party appear bleak at present. If the Labour left formed a new party, they could join the Green party in standing 30-50 candidates in Labour’s safest 100 seats (in places where neither the Greens or Lib Dems performed well), and they could deliberately split the vote in the same marginal seats that Labour would need to win to achieve a parliamentary majority.

A new party of the left - with a grouping of MPs in double figures - could attract tens of thousands of members, and potentially union funding, in order to establish themselves as a credible force over the course of this parliament.

In any subsequent STV election, they could stand everywhere, and have a fair chance of achieving representation and of motivating previously neglected sections of the electorate.

This grouping is more speculative, but we have to presume that almost all Labour MPs would support rejoining the single market and customs union, and ultimately the EU. There will also be a majority that are very supportive of electoral reform as a means of keeping the right out of majority power.

Electoral reform to a preferential voting system – that fairly suppresses the far-right - might just represent the sweeping change to UK politics that would make the EU more comfortable with the UK’s reaccession.

Rejoining the single market and customs union is widely regarded as vital in allowing the UK to achieve the kind of economic growth that could earn the respect and tolerance of British voters, and hold off the advance of the far right.

If a new party were to form along these lines (essentially those of honesty and competence) from within the Labour parliamentary party, it would likely gain considerable support from the multiple sectors of the economy that have been hit hard by Brexit. It could join the Greens and the left in standing 30-40 candidates in Labour’s 100 safest seats, in those places where the remain vote was highest, and where LibDems and Greens perform quite well, but not well enough to realistically challenge Labour.

Previously, the policy of “stand everywhere and anywhere and hope for the best” would cause greater progressive losses with increasing popularity of minor progressive parties. Following the Sprint for PR plan, progressive voters clearly preferring these smaller parties over Labour in Labour’s 100 safest seats would allow smaller parties to stand aside more candidates in competitive Conservative and Reform facing seats, and so allow greater progressive representation.

By limiting their ambitions to 30-35 seats in the next parliament, the left, centre-left, and greens can demand votes in their target seats as the very least they deserve given their likely support at well over the 5% of seats these wins would represent.

If they are clearly on course to win these seats, they (and the Liberal Democrats) could withdraw candidates in 100 more marginal seats that they want Labour to win against the Conservatives and Reform.

With this plan, supporting new, small parties makes progressive success more likely and would increase progressive representation relative to business as usual.

All parties would of course prefer the current Labour government legislate for electoral reform to STV early in the current parliament, but failing to do so would just ensure the execution of the Sprint for PR plan was necessary for forcing electoral reform via a hung parliament.

Vital to the success of reaccession to the EU will be the establishment of a moderate, pro-EU conservative party. With the extent to which the Conservatives have tacked to the right under Boris Johnson and his successors, there is a large political space for a party to form, potentially with a core of the respected politicians who were purged from the party under Johnson’s leadership.

If the EU could be reassured that a UK government could not be formed in the future without the calming influence of a pro-European party, the path back to the EU, and to prosperity, becomes so much smoother.