I focus on a mechanism to have transparency throughout these processes. The review process needs to be open and transparent. We can see what information is going in, and we can see what information is coming out and being fed to the decision-maker.
As scientists, if we know the information is getting to a decision-maker, but they base their decision on a variety of other factors, we at least know that the science is being considered. That's currently not the case, and I think that's the root of the problem. I'd say that focusing on transparency would go a long way in helping those issues.