As a means of following the example of Trump make necessary constitutional changes via the mechanism of orders in council. Explained by Douglas Carswell as a way to get necessary legislation done quickly in the same sort of way as is done by the Oval office with executive orders. As a way to tame the power of the civil service Douglas says there will be squealing from those who suddenly have to obey the Prime Minister but it is the only way for a party manifesto to mean anything. Without them, promises made during an election season are meaningless and unable to be enacted no matter how much the British public want the policies.
While I see the value of that when we had, say, Maggie Thatcher in No. 10, I dread to think what damage Comrade Starmer could manage with that sort of power.
I agree that there should be some form of restructure with how the Prime Minister is able to get things done. The red tape mentioned in interviews with previous ministers suggests there’s hardly any room to move when it comes to enacting policies mentioned in Manifesto. Patrick above makes a good point about when this power goes into the hands of those who would probably do more harm than good. So, unfortunately the power has to be balanced in some way to ensure very damaging legislation doesn’t get through.
