Photo attribution below
I suggested in my first post that the UK’s system of government is not fit for purpose. I think it no longer really does what it’s supposed to do. So, if I’m right, how do we change it?
Simply voting in another government won’t change the system, of course. If the people change but the system remains the same, nothing signfiicant has changed.
As I pointed out in a comment on the first post, the usual means of introducing changes to the government system is to place one or more eminent and suitably experienced people in a room together – retired judges or Civil Sevice mandarins, for exmaple – and to ask them to use their great brains to consider the difficult questions and come up with an answer. But I think we need something a little more organised than this.
If we want to introduce genuine, systemic change – a series of changes to the system of government – we need to design those changes in an organised and coherent way. Any design activity involves:
- agreeing a clear statement of what you want the thing you’re designing to do;
- working out the best possible way of achieving the what – or in other words, some hows – given any known constraints.
As we’re dealing with a system here – by which I mean a set of interacting parts which work together to do something – it’s important that our ‘hows’ work together with one another as efficiently as possible.
I’m bothering to say all this partly because it’s essential to have a process if you’re going to change or design anything. But I also I think that one of the fundamental problems with our current system of government is that it really doesn’t do the job of ‘design’ very well. In fact, quite the opposite but I’ll return to that in another post. In the next post I want to look at some of the purposes – the whats – of the government system.
Photo: Pavilion by R Buckminster Fuller by Mathew Burpee Used under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share-Alike 2.0 license.