What enhances the accountability and transparency in the choice for prime minister in the British parliamentary elections?

by Seva Lamberdar Wed Feb 12, 2014 3:47 pm

In Britain, where the Constitution on parliamentary democracy was the model for India’s current Constitution since January 1950, the voters in the parliamentary elections don’t vote for political parties which do not declare the names of their prime ministerial candidates prior to the election.

In other words, by learning openly and clearly the names and identities of potential Govt. leaders (prime ministers) from various political parties before the election, the British voters are better able to judge and scrutinize them properly before casting votes and even compare them against one another according to their capabilities, achievements and qualities of leadership to guide the nation competently and effectively afterwards.

Thus the voters in Britain tend to vote in the parliamentary elections for contestants (seeking seats in the House of Commons) who belong to the party with not only the most attractive election agenda / program for the nation, but which also has chosen and declared beforehand the name of the best prime ministerial candidate to implement the political agenda as the next Govt. leader.

The British election process thus makes it necessary for the potential Govt. leaders (prime ministers) selected by different political parties to contest the parliamentary elections and win seats as M.P.s (members of parliament) in the Lower House of Parliament (the House of Commons) before one of them (from the winning party) gets the opportunity to be nation’s prime minister. There is little chance therefore for the winning party (or coalition) in Britain to appoint an outsider (including a puppet or a figurehead) to the job of prime minister, who does not hold a seat in the Lower House of Parliament.

The above indicates that the prime minister in Britain goes through an extensive scrutiny and evaluation by public (voters) during the parliamentary elections before getting the opportunity to lead the nation. Furthermore, the pre-election selection and declaration of prime ministerial candidates by the British political parties also eliminates the post-election confusion, cronyism, nepotism, politicking (including horse-trading, bribery and private deal-making involving the winning party) and delay in the new prime minister assuming the office and moving into the official residence quickly, which certainly would be the case if the winning party had not finalized its choice for the prime ministerial candidate beforehand.

In conclusion, the naming of the prime ministerial candidates by different political parties before the parliamentary elections in Britain is as important, if not more, as announcing beforehand the future political agendas (plans) for the country by each party; which certainly leads to the greater accountability, transparency and direct public participation (voting) in the election for British prime minister (Govt. leader), and it also avoids any delay in the new prime minister assuming the office immediately after the parliamentary elections and moving quickly into the official prime minister’s residence.

(http://creative.sulekha.com/what-enhances-the-accountability-and-transparency-in-the-choice-for-prime-minister-in-the-british-parliamentary-elections_614339_blog)

by Seva Lamberdar Sat Dec 02, 2017 9:48 am

Considering the Indian democracy was founded on the principles of British parliamentary system, the leaders of political parties in India should be chosen in the same manner as in Britain to ensure the effectiveness of democratic process.

What enhances the accountability and transparency in the choice for prime minister in the British parliamentary elections?

What enhances the accountability and transparency in the choice for prime minister in the British parliamentary elections?

Re: What enhances the accountability and transparency in the choice for prime minister in the British parliamentary elections?