Democracy rests not merely upon the mechanics of voting, but upon the consent of the governed. Yet Britain continues to tolerate a constitutional arrangement in which the office of Prime Minister is filled not by a direct vote of the British people, but through the internal processes of a political party. The individual who enters 10 Downing Street does so because he or she has secured the confidence of party colleagues or party members—not because a majority of the British electorate has personally chosen that individual to lead the nation.
That distinction matters.
Political parties are, in reality, private organisations. They have memberships, constitutions and internal elections. Their decisions determine who occupies the country's highest political office, while tens of millions of citizens who are not members of those organisations have no direct say in the selection of the Prime Minister. Whatever one thinks of Britain's constitutional arrangements, it should not be confused with a direct democratic mandate from the electorate.
If Andy Burnham now occupies the office of Prime Minister, he does so because he secured the support of his party, not because a majority of British voters elected him personally. That is a constitutional reality which many people either overlook or choose to ignore.
Unfortunately, the preference for appearance over reality appears to extend beyond constitutional questions.
One of the most striking examples is the creation of "10 North", promoted as a northern counterpart to 10 Downing Street and presented as a symbolic centre of government in Manchester. The branding was clearly intended to evoke familiarity and authority, creating the impression that Britain had established a genuine northern equivalent of the Prime Minister's famous address.
The reality is rather less impressive.
"10 North" is not an address at all. It is a name applied to offices located at 47 Lloyd Street, Manchester M2 5LE. The title therefore creates an impression which the physical location does not support. Rather than identifying where the office actually is, it borrows the prestige and symbolism associated with Number 10 Downing Street.
Some will dismiss this as clever branding. Others may call it harmless marketing. But when taxpayers are funding government communications, presentation should never take precedence over honesty.
Had the Government genuinely wished to establish a permanent office known as "10 North", it possessed several straightforward options. It could have acquired premises whose address naturally corresponded with the name. It could have selected an existing Number 10 elsewhere in Manchester. It could even have exercised its considerable influence to rename a street or renumber a building through the proper legal processes. Governments routinely undertake far more complex administrative changes.
Instead, the administration chose to invent a title while leaving the reality unchanged.
Perhaps this is only a small example. Yet it reflects a much larger problem in modern politics: the increasing reliance upon carefully constructed images, slogans and manufactured symbolism instead of straightforward truth. Increasingly, governments appear more concerned with how policies look than with what they actually are.
Public trust cannot be built upon illusion. Citizens deserve candour rather than choreography, substance rather than symbolism, and facts rather than carefully crafted impressions.
A government confident in its achievements has no need to manufacture appearances. It simply tells the truth.