[gsnedders]

> You have to wonder why the Brits keep electing these elites to top positions in the government (it's a little tougher to keep alumnae from being given positions in the corporate world).

We don't. We elect a (one) Member of Parliament for the constituency we live in. Following the election, the leader of the largest party attempts to form a government (thereby making them Prime Minister), and they then appoint cabinet ministers.

Most elections end up with people voting in favour of a party, regardless of who the party has nominated to stand in the election, and those viewed as "senior" members of the party are typically asked to stand in safe seats (regardless of where the seat is and whether they have any ties there!).

[gsnedders]

…it's probably worthwhile to add to this the fact that (cabinet) ministers can be from either the democratically elected House of Commons, or the House of Lords. There's typically a small number of ministers from the House of Lords.

[mynegation]

But does not that mean that prime minister must also be a member of parliament, so at least people in one district voted for her or him? It is not the same as whole populace of UK votes directly for Pam, but still.

[gsnedders]

Yes, they must have won one constituency.

In theory, the Prime Minister can be in the House of Lords, though since 1902 this hasn't occurred—in principle, the Prime Minister merely has to be capable of commanding confidence of the House of Commons (i.e., must be able to win any motion of confidence, and to be able to ensure supply). It seems highly unlikely for this to occur in future, however.