So many of our problems come from trying to make a parliamentary system work like a presidency, with none of the checks and balances of an actual presidential system: formal separation of powers, separate elections for the legislature, direct elections for the leader &c. [THREAD]
2. If we want a parliamentary democracy, that comes with certain conditions. It is not compatible with letting party members appoint a Prime Minister, who then uses the powers of the executive to shut down our elected Parliament.
3. It is not compatible with letting unelected party activists overrule our elected representatives, by forcing on them a leader whom they have voted to remove - a leader whose influence over the legislative process then comes from those same MPs, whose legitimacy has been denied
4. It is not compatible with framing an election around TV debates that shut out other parties, or that tell voters they are deciding which of two leaders should become Prime Minister - either of whom might, perfectly legitimately, be replaced by someone different mid-Parliament.
5. Since WW2, half our PMs have taken over mid-term. That's ok if leaders draw their legitimacy from MPs: if leaders, like laws, are made by Parlt. It is nuts if MPs draw their legitimacy from their leaders; if elections are presidential contests betn leaders who resign mid-term.
6. If we want leaders with their own personal mandates, which they can use to overrule our elected representatives, we need major institutional change: to ensure that this power comes from voters, not party members; that there are checks & balances; & that we think abt succession
7. What we must not do is to let a party presidency override our elected representatives & annex their powers, while broadcasters & FPTP shut out new entrants. That's the path we're on now, & it's narrowing voter choice, weakening accountability & shrivelling our democracy. [END]
