Radical Reform - Elect Problems, Get Solutions

After every General Election - literally, immediately after, as newly-elected MPs for various regions are announced by returning officers - there are calls for a "reform of First Past the Post".  The Party of government wants to scrap First Past the Post because they believe it will make it easier for them to win subsequent elections, with larger majorities. Parties experiencing returning an MP to Parliament for the first time want to scrap First Past the Post because they believe it will result in them returning more MPs at future elections.  And the losing Party wants to scrap First Past the Post because...well, they don't want to lose again, and demanding a change to the way votes are counted is a lot easier than actually doing the work to become re-electable.

A lot of ordinary people in the electorate want to scrap First Past the Post, too, because it just seems fundamentally unfair that larger regions are always more likely to get their preferred candidate elected, and that the system itself makes it difficult for alternatives to the established powers to have any real chance of success.

However, none of the calls for electoral reform are actually radical. Every system that's being discussed as a replacement for First Past the Post has its own flaws, and many bring an increased risk of favouring extremist and single-issue Parties, which would not deliver any level of service to society as a whole.

What if we didn't vote for Parties, but for the problems we want worked on, and the people we want to solve them?

Instead of "Jenny Jones - Labour;  Naseem Tahib - Liberal Democrats: Tom Smith - Conservatives;  Alex Gavan - Green" on a ballot paper, independent social awareness groups would be established, to identify and record the biggest problems in society, which would be grouped by:
. Those costing the most money to manage
. Those prompting the most frequent complaints
. Those holding the country back from high-value growth

The electorate would then go to the polls, and see a ballot paper showing up to ten problems, and a document with the names of anyone who wanted to throw their hat into the democratic ring, their professional and/or lived experience background, and how they proposed to solve the various problems. (This could be presented on a tablet, with audio options, for ease, with individuals who would struggle with technology being able to identify ahead of the vote that they would need a private room, with printed/Braille material, and sufficient time to read through everything. The election process could be extended across multiple days, to allow for the increased complexity of this process over the more simple ballots we currently have.)

Voters would rank problems in order of priority (to them), and would identify the candidate they felt came across as best qualified to work on solving the problems.

The vote for problems and people to work on solutions would remain as First Past the Post, but without the partisan elements; Parliament would simply be a diverse group of people who were brought together to solve problems.

There would be annual review periods, where representatives could be sacked or promoted, according to their individual contributions and the collective process, just as is usually the case in the business sector.

Individuals elected to Parliament in this manner would be required to spend two days per week in the region which elected them, and three days a week in Parliament; the two days they spent in their region, they would be required to be actively seeking engagement with the electorate there, and identifying local-level problems, which they would work directly with business and VCSE leaders on the ground to develop and deliver solutions for.

This would both reduce the council tax burden on individual households, as there would be no additional need to finance a Town, District, and County Council, and would also create an urgent focus for Westminster to deliver genuine, sustainable economic growth, and an unmuzzled VCSE sector, in every area of the UK, so that all regions had an equal opportunity to have their local level problems resolved.  

It would also put businesses in better communication with local residents, which opens a wider recruitment pool, as more people become aware of the opportunities in their local area, and get some insight into the transferable skills those opportunities require, while businesses are able to understand the challenges and barriers facing people in the communities they serve, and as a result adapt their recruitment and working practices to dismantle those barriers.

Finally, the ability for anyone with ideas to go forward without needing to have achieved a certain level and popularity within a Parliamentary Party, with a review process governed by an independent panel, to carry out background and due diligence checks, and to filter the deluded and extremists, and ensure the remaining candidates are being truthful about their backgrounds, broadens the range of representation, and actively addresses systemic inequalities faced by marginalised groups by making it easier for people from those groups to have an opportunity to put their case to the populace, and be considered as possible change-makers.