I mostly agree with the sentiment here, but the focus on "accountable diplomats" misses a bigger point. It's not just about who gets appointed to ambassadorships; it's about having a coherent, strategic foreign policy that these diplomats are actually meant to implement.
Instead of just scrutinising individuals, we should be strengthening parliamentary oversight of foreign policy itself. That means giving select committees real teeth to examine the strategy behind our international engagements, not just the names on the door of embassies. We need proper debate and approval for major foreign policy decisions, not just rubber-stamping appointments.
And let's be honest, the idea of some parliamentary committee vetting every single diplomat is a bit of a distraction. The real issue is ensuring our foreign service is professional, meritocratic, and adequately funded to do its job effectively.
Discussion (4)
Sign in to join the discussion. Debate and humour are both very welcome.
Mock the policy. Not the person. Community principles →