I was thinking a bit more about how representatonal democracy is intended to work. There's some push for electoral reform just now- especially as the 2-party model is collapsing - but it normally limits itself to a move towards proportional representation. I think the election of a representative for a constituency is actually the real strength of our system: they should deeply understand the concerns of their own constituents, and represent those in the houses of parliament.
The big problem is our combative, partisan politicsl parties.
How about this:
1.We keep elections for MPs, but political parties are banned, and candidates are not permitted to align themselves with one. Instead, each candidate explains their own position to the local electorate, campaigning on their own merits. With the Internet, this is easy now, and we already publish each vote by an MP - a level of accountability impossible even 50 years ago.
2.We don't have a whole government of one party: instead each of the offices of state are voted for individually (including a prime minister who largely coordinates). Since they're voted in, that means that those offices are ikely to be aligned with the views of the majority of MPs, and hence the majority of the population. Each office of state still needs to propose their policy, which have to be voted in (exactly as they already have to) but crucially those bills are voted on by MPs with no whip, no party. So it allows for nuance, and cooperation on areas where there's agreement, without having to conform to an adversarial, identity-based rigidity across all issues.
3.The civil service departments report to the relevant secretary of state, as they do now.
4.Instead of a general election called by the prime minister, have elections for 1/3 of the MPs every 2 years in a fixed rhythm like council elections. This stops wild fluctuations, and gives quicker feedback for the electorate to shift the direction of government in a more responsive way. Offices of state to be re-elected after each of these 2-year cycles, and additionally when requested by a minimum number of MPs.
5.No central funding, obviously, since there are no parties. Funding only to local candidates/MPs, with a proof of geographical link. Eg individuals can fund their local candidates, businesses can fund candidates where they are located, trade unions can give the political tithe of their members only to the candidate local to those Union members.
It's kind of moving towards the Swiss system, with more immediate accountability for each bill - but adapted to the UK's size, by keeping it representative through the MP
Thoughts?