UK Political System - Does it Need reform ?...An update

 

Two years ago I published a blog describing in detail some of the problems with our UK political system, as I saw it then.

 Last year's General Election result ‘set the seal’ on the unsuitability of our ‘First Past the Post’ (FPP) system, and reinforced the need for change. This will need to be radical if we are to maintain  our democracy in a healthy state, and ensure it continues to be fit for purpose in the 21^st Century. A reappraisal is particularly important at a time when populism is eroding modern democratic institutions and the world as a whole is tending towards autocracies as the chosen method of government.

 Amongst other things, to achieve this we will need to exert more control on the UK government of the day, and this will involve some form of continuous assessment ‘with teeth’. We cannot afford to continue to allow governments we elect with large working majorities 'carte blanche' to do whatever they want for the whole of their now mandatory 5-year term.

Here are the principal arguments for change, based on the indisputable fact that governments are answerable to us as taxpayers. Starmer himself made the assertion on the steps of #10 Downing Street in July 2024 that his government was there to serve us…let’s see him ‘put his (i.e. our) money where his mouth is…..’

 

1.       As taxpayers, we pay the wages of both elected politicians and civil servants. They are all, therefore, technically our employees.

2.       As the electorate, we entrust them with the huge responsibility of running the country for us – as ordinary people, they are all error-prone like ourselves, it is our duty to monitor what they are doing, and ensure they don’t compromise our financial or physical security through their actions.

3.       As their employer, we also have the responsibility of assessing their progress and development, particularly when they are newly-elected. We should therefore have a mechanism for judging their performance at regular formal reviews, which should be held at least annually. This is standard practice for all employees, both in the private and the public sectors of our industries, and government should not be exempt.

4.       If the government of the day fail to meet their targets at a formal review, they should become liable for some form of disciplinary action. This could take various forms, from a written warning all the way to dismissal of the government and a new election e.g. for gross mis-management of the economy. It should also result in suspension of any applicable annual pay rises and bonuses for the individuals deemed responsible until remedial action had proven satisfactory.

5.       As employers, it should be our responsibility to decide what day to day personal expenses and remuneration are acceptable for our politicians, and inform them of the limits we set. In industrial employment settings, this is always strictly controlled and monitored by the employer; for consistency this control should therefore extend to our elected politicians. We cannot continue to allow them to 'mark their own homework' as they currently do via the Parliamentary Standards Committee, particularly where public finances are concerned.

6.       At a time when the new government is making a 'big deal' of changing workers' T&Cs and rights, it should include itself in the reckoning by making the executive government more accountable from day to day to its paymasters, the electorate.  I have already proposed a number of measures which would address this in a previous blog – see link for details.

This important principle could be summed up in a single question - "Who regulates the legislators ?".

Do I have any confidence that our new government will rise to the challenge and use its ‘super-majority’ to institute the necessary changes in its own working practices and accountability ?

Not a bit of it….vested interests in keeping the system as it is are simply too strong. 

Neither of the two main parties want to see any challenge to their current monopoly on power, let alone an independent one, so it simply won't happen….unless some extreme circumstance forces it to.

Since we have already made the mistake of electing a government with a ridiculously large majority on a mere 20% of the eligible vote, and did so simply to punish the incompetence of its predecessor, we will, I’m afraid, have to live with the consequences of our mistake…for the next 5 4 years at least (yes, only another 4 years to go !).

While I would be the first to criticise anyone wishing for the current government to fail before we get the chance to vote it out, our only chance of seeing any change before 2029 would be a mass vote of no confidence in their own government by Labour back-benchers, followed by a resignation and declaration of a snap election. As we saw with the benefits bill climbdown, this could be achieved by only 120 or so rebels. Since the majority of them would realise that they would then lose their seats to Reform or the Tories, the probabililty of this happening ay time soon is virtually nil.

That said, the events of the last month (June-July 2025) have reinforced an important principle that some may have been unaware of - the larger the majority a government has, the more diverse will be the views of its back-benchers, and the more 'unruly' (I'm speaking in parliamentary terms, of course!) they will become. It's paradoxical that this effect can introduce an extra level of checks and balances on a wayward leadership team - for this government at least, that may yet prove to be its saving grace....

It's also become apparent that the fissure in Labour's unity (if indeed this particular vast contingent ever really had any) is widening by the day, the latest example of its effect being the formation of a new 'party of the left' led by...who else....Corbyn himself and one of Starmer's more disaffected back-benchers. 

It's difficult to see how a fatally-flawed government and a Conservative Party still effectively in 'rehab' will be now able to stem the tide towards multi-party politics. 

We may even end up with PR...now there's a thought.

Above all else, as electors, we should all be careful what we wish for next time round….and vote accordingly.

First published 12.10.24

Revised 6.7.25