Voters must approve PM appointees

Electoral reform ● National by TellingItStraight · 🏷️ 1. Concerned Citizen · Regional · 5 months ago
4

I'm fed up with politicians making decisions without asking us, it's about time we took back control. These career politicians are out of touch with real people, I see it every day in the DIY store, customers are frustrated with the system. We need to make sure the people in charge are accountable to us, not just their party bosses.

We need a system where the public gets to vote on key appointments, like advisors to the PM. It's simple, if they want to bring in some fancy new face, we should get a say. This would stop all these behind the door deals and make sure the people in power are actually representing us. I mean, who do these politicians think they are, making decisions without asking us, it's JUST NOT RIGHT.

It's not rocket science, we can use the existing electoral system to make it work. We just need to add a new layer of accountability, so when a PM wants to appoint someone, it goes to a public confirmation vote within a fixed period, unless Parliament rejects the appointment first.

This would not mean voting on every civil servant or junior adviser. It should apply only to the most powerful political appointments, where influence is high and public accountability is currently weak. Keep it simple, keep it transparent, and stop letting Westminster mark its own homework.

If someone is going to shape decisions that affect millions of people, the public should not find out after the deal is done. They should have a say before the person gets the power.

TellingItStraight 🏠 Borough Councillor Regional

🇬🇧 The Common Sense Brigade

⑂ Sign in to adapt this
Share: Reddit

Discussion (10)

Sign in to join the discussion. Debate and humour are both very welcome.

Direct democracy on every appointee sounds clean until you remember most of them are technical roles nobody outside the department has heard of. The vetting principle is right, the mechanism's the harder bit.
2
About time someone called this out. The PM's mates getting all the top jobs without anyone asking us, this is what "taking back control" was supposed to mean.
0
The current cronies-and-donors pipeline genuinely is broken. Confirmation hearings for the senior posts is a very modest fix, most democracies do something similar.
0
i interview every barista we hire. the idea that PM appointments don't get the same level of scrutiny as a coffee shop hire is genuinely bizarre.
0
The complexity argument doesn't wash. We sort out complex ops in the field with less faff than these lot make over an appointment.
0
tbh this is just impractical. who's reading the CVs of every spad? we'd be voting weekly. i'd back proper confirmation hearings tho.
0
It's not about voting on every junior advisor, it's about the senior, policy-shaping appointments that currently just appear overnight with no scrutiny.
0
Sensible.
1
The principle is right. The implementation needs more than "public vote" though, independent review panels with proper teeth would do most of the work without the populism risk.
0
Aye, independent panels are a good idea, and I agree with you there.

But it feels a bit like we're just swapping one set of unaccountable people for another. What’s to stop those panels from becoming just as cosy and out of touch as the current lot, especially if they’re appointed by the same system? We need a final check that’s truly with the people.
0

Mock the policy. Not the person. Community principles →