I think I lean towards Comfed's point of view but I'd be willing to entertain a draft/proposal on Jay's "challenge the appointment" idea.
 

(07-18-2022, 04:37 PM)Belschaft Wrote: maintaing direct election to constitutional ministries - foreign affairs & defense

Why are these Ministries so essential they must exist while others do not have to? I can imagine scenarios where neither Minister would be appointed. If the SPSF Officers are capable of jointly exercising authority and building the SPSF subject to the Prime Minister's decision making as head of government, then I think that's fine and there doesn't have to be a Minister of Defense (in this case, the Prime Minister is the civilian leader of the military, similarly to how the Minister of Defense is now). If the Prime Minister would like to handle high-level negotiations themselves, I can understand them not appointing a Minister of Foreign Affairs.

(07-18-2022, 04:37 PM)Belschaft Wrote: Some of our best Ministers would never have made it into office via appointment and changes like us becoming a Defender region probably wouldn't have come about without it.

It's hard for us to know what Ministers may have made it into office under which system. On the contrary, appointment systems can be beneficial because they allow mentorship and direct encouragement, instead of forcing PMs with Ministers they didn't choose or don't see as having a long-term future.