What I will say here is that my own writings were based on how to solve the problem of the UBP disbanding and a critical mass of its members and supporters moving to support a new Party. If that were to develop then we would be no closer to helping move forward the maturity of our politics. We would, quite frankly, have the UBP with a new name and nothing else.
While I agree with Denis that the dissolution of the UBP would indeed spark an ideological dispute within the PLP, as long as the new entity replacing the UBP is the de facto UBP, this internal PLP discourse will once again become stifled and politics return to its present status quo. The question then is how to form a new Party in such a way as to doom the UBP from ever forming the government again (other than a junior partner), while obtaining support from both the PLP and the UBP as they exist today. To me this would avoid a reincarnation of the UBP, while also fuelling discourse within the PLP – ultimately maturing our politics.
The only way I see for this to happen is for the UBP to continue on, with at least two new parties forming to challenge the PLP-UBP hegemony. This scenario avoids a wholesale desertion of the UBP and joining a new party en masse – and so resurrecting the UBP.
I do agree with Denis’ assertion that new parties would be best targetting marginal seats than charging gung ho into PLP-UBP strongholds, but this blitz tactic, benefiting from split votes in the marginals, must in turn see the marginals converted in new party strongholds.