Change from the Centre begins with a conviction: unless the centre of British politics drives meaningful change, the extremes will. We want to develop a campaigning think tank that makes the case for a radical centre and helps people understand what a renewed political system could look like.
There is plenty of talk about “Broken Britain”. My starting point is that Britain remains full of capable people, good ideas and communities willing to make things better, but our politics is failing. We need a political system that gives that talent a better chance to shape our future.
People who feel let down by politics deserve a convincing response. The political extremes too often exploit people’s fears by encouraging hate and division, directing blame towards religious groups, immigrants, the wealthy or whichever section of society offers a convenient target. CftC rejects that scapegoating. There is every reason to debate immigration, taxation and inequality seriously; treating whole groups of people as the enemy takes us further from practical solutions. The flip side of this is that simply asking people to trust the same institutions, or to accept that meaningful reform is too difficult, will also achieve very little and will leave people with no choice but to look at the extremes.
What I mean by the radical centre
For me, centrism means judging ideas by their merits and their consequences, with a willingness to challenge arrangements that are failing. It requires ambition about the scale of change and honesty about the choices involved in delivering it. I adopted the phrase “radical centre” after reading Tony Blair’s commentary The Labour Party Is Playing With Fire Over Its Future and the Future of the Country, published by the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change on 26 May 2026. Its case for a centre willing to pursue radical change reflected arguments I had been developing in the years of thinking that led up to the creation of CftC.
The centre cannot be satisfied with managing government a little more competently than the last incumbents. It needs to ask whether the way we govern allows us to tackle the problems people face. Our electoral system, our institutions and our division of power should be open to examination, however ingrained in our system they have become.
That approach also requires independence from political parties. I was a Conservative councillor and parliamentary candidate. I left the party because I believed it had moved away from the politics I wanted to support as it drifted to the right. Change from the Centre reflects my decision to focus on the arguments for reform across party boundaries.
I want people who are disillusioned with politics to have a constructive route back into the debate. We should be able to express frustration with the system while taking responsibility for developing something better.
A coherent picture of political reform
The question at the heart of Change from the Centre is straightforward: what should a renewed British political system actually look like?
There is valuable work being done on proportional representation, constitutional reform and devolution. Our ambition is to draw on that work and examine how the different reforms should fit together. Each change needs to make sense as part of the system people will ultimately live with and believe in.
Changing how we elect MPs raises questions about how governments are formed and held accountable. A written constitution would need to explain where power sits and how it is limited. Reform of the second chamber needs to be considered alongside the role of the Commons and the representation of different parts of the country.
Devolution adds another set of practical questions. What should national government decide? Which decisions belong at regional or local level? How should responsibilities, funding and accountability fit together so that people know who is answerable for the services and decisions that affect them?
We want to help develop a substantive model of how these arrangements should all fit together. That would give voters something concrete to question and improve, and give campaigners a clearer account of the wider change they are seeking.
That work should build on the expertise of organisations already campaigning for reform. Conversations with organisations including the Local Government Information Unit, Unlock Democracy and the Electoral Reform Society have helped shape my thinking. The case for CftC is that we can contribute by connecting the different arguments and explaining their practical implications to a wider audience.
A government that takes prevention seriously
A fundamental purpose of government has to be to improve people’s lives. We want to explore how government could give greater weight to preventing problems and judge decisions over a longer period.
Rehabilitation for lower-level offenders is one example. The question should be which approach best protects the public by reducing future offending. Similar questions arise when considering support for young people or helping people remain independent for longer.
A preventative approach needs scrutiny too. We should test what works, what it costs and who benefits. We also need to ask why the way government is organised and funded makes it easier to respond to a crisis than to invest in preventing it.
Turning analysis into a campaigning think tank
The CftC YouTube channel is where much of this work begins. It gives me a way to analyse political decisions, challenge weak arguments and explain the consequences of policy choices. It also gives viewers a way to question the analysis and contribute their own experience.
The next step is to develop that discussion into a programme of research and campaigning. We want to investigate public attitudes, including through polling where funding allows, and use that evidence alongside policy research to develop proposals people can understand and assess.
Understanding what voters want will matter as much as describing institutional changes. We need to know which problems people want to solve and how they would judge, once the change has been made, whether it has made a difference. Public engagement should help shape the proposals as they develop.
Campaigning means making the case for those proposals and seeking the support needed to advance them. It will require clear priorities, accessible explanations and cooperation with people who share the case for change, even where we disagree elsewhere.
CftC is at an early stage. The channel and analysis exist today; a larger research programme and sustained campaigns are ambitions we are working towards. Our task is to build the evidence and capacity to take them forward.
The experience behind the project
My perspective comes from experience inside politics and local government. I was first elected in 1999 and have served as Leader of Cambridgeshire County Council, chaired a planning committee and held responsibility for both adult social care and children’s services. My work has also included political communications and mentoring councillors as an LGA Lead Peer.
Those roles have made me interested in how decisions are reached, how responsibility is shared and what gets in the way of delivery. I want to bring that practical experience to the debate about reform, while learning from others who see different parts of the problem.
Supporting the work
We want to attract support for research and campaigns that take these ideas forward. Funding could help us commission polling, develop a model of constitutional reform informed by the strongest features of international systems, and publish findings that people can use in public debate.
As CftC develops, we intend to be clear about who funds our work and to protect our freedom to reach our own conclusions. We welcome conversations with potential supporters, researchers and anyone who wants to help turn the case for reform into practical proposals.
You can follow the discussion on the CftC YouTube channel or contact me at martin@curtiscomms.co.uk to discuss contributing to the work.