What if the Prime minister and the whole royal family in England are assainated?
350671
If the Prime Minister were assasinated, there wouldn't be much of a constitutional problem.  The Labour Party would still have a working majority in the House of Commons.  The Deputy Prime Minister (John Prescott) would probably act as Prime Minister while the Labour Party elected a new leader.  The new leader would then become the Prime Minister. \n\nAs for the royal family, there is a long line of succession.  Even if the whole of the Queen's immediate family were assasinated, there would be someone left who was "next in line".
1051559
The Queen gives the benefit of her estate to the government of Britain which is far in excess of the Civil List which is the money she gets each year.\n\nWhilst there are problems with the monarchy such as the Queen managers to get an opt out of most law and therefore her staff are not protected to the same extent as the law provides for other people.  I also understand the wages paid are much lower than that paid to people in similar jobs elsewhere.\n\nBut and it is a big BUT, who or what would you replace the monarchy with.   There is hardly a politician out there who has not been tainted in some way.\n\nLook at the problems created with the American Presidency and Congress that actually prevents and severly delays needed legislation.   The bill to pay Government employees  has been delayed so severely a number of times in recent years that staff have been flown back to the States from American bases and embassies abroad.\n\nIt also seems significant that European countries that retain a monarchy appear much safer, laid back and sensible.\n\nI think there few people of any political persuasion that would fancy Tony Blair as a president or any other parties politicians so where does that leave this question?
5333
prince charles and he's also england's future king.
654894
Nothing really.All it is another way to run another contry. Its a monarchy.Really I don't know what is so special about royalty.Their just normal people like us.
734435
The title "Prime Minister" refers to the days when the Prime Minister's job was to minister to the Monarch who ruled the country. It's actually quite a derogatory title in its way! Nowadays, whilst the Prime Minister may be at the head of the government, ruling the country, they're still technically the Queen's Prime Minister, which is why they have to report to her on the political situation of the country. Technically the Queen still has the right to dissolve her government if she chooses, and the Prime Minister is technically still under her rule. I'm sure the country would be happy if she were to sack Tony Blair, dissolve the government and call a general election, but that's not really going to happen. It's more of a keeping of the traditions, because the monarch wouldn't use those powers, democracy being as important a principle to them as it is to the rest of the country.
884600
ONly she knows for sure. Id imagine growing up in a time where royalty had no power she believes in representational gov't and the british system.\n\nBeing older though I'd imagine she believes individual rights belong to those who deserve them.
445325
I'm the American son of a British father, so I hold dual national status and carry both US and UK passports. I am thus able to view this from both perspectives, I think, so I'll toss in my two cents/pence.\n\nThe Royals are indeed pointless in terms of actual power and general usefulness (the Queen is only the titular head of state and wields no real power that I can see -- and quite right too!) and they cost the British taxpayer an absolute fortune to house, clothe, feed and protect in the almost obscene luxury and style to which they are accustomed. \n\nThat said, they also bring in mega tourist dollars/pounds/euros and all the media attention associated with prestige, pomp and circumstance. I sometimes wonder if they are more beloved in the former British colonies than at home. Odd, that. Still, there are very clearly many Britons who remain loyal and supportive of the titular monarchy, even as there are many who would love nothing better than to see them deposed and made to work for a living. It is quite a conundrum, isn't it?\n\nAs to your query about why they interest people so much, your guess is as good as mine. I expect it's because we live in such a celebrity culture (on both sides of the pond and in most other modern, westernized nations, as well) and people just can't get enough of this sort of thing. It goes without saying that I am made nauseous by this fact, but I am hardly representative of either my fellow countrymen or those in the land of my forebears. \n\nFor what it's worth, I think the much-maligned Prince Charles is actually an intelligent and generally decent man with sound ideas regarding the environment, architecture, etc. His father is a complete jackanapes who puts his foot in his mouth on a regular basis. The Queen herself is okay with me, albeit as pompous and dowdy as a modern monarch could even dream of being. I always liked the late Princess Diana and was sorry for her tragic loss. I like Fergie, as well. Prince William seems a decent and responsible sort but Harry is trouble and will doubtless remain so, his training at Sandhurst notwithstanding.\n\nI'll not bother with the rest of the Royals and I expect you have your own well-formed views in any case. I think the best and fairest thing to do would be for the British people to hold a referendum on the desirability of the monarchy, literally a popular vote with an up or down verdict. I confess I would be very intrigued to see the end result. Please keep me posted, ok?
894586
The United Kingdom does not have a President.  It is a parliamentary democracy.  The head of government is Prime Minister Tony Blair, and the head of state is Queen Elizabeth II.
941848
Blair is still in power and his party is still a stooge to bush govt. so the chances are bleak.it will happen only when the british elect leftist government.
358508
vote. What a pointless waste of time, get rid of this Head Of State rubbish, you need one democratically elected leader and that's that.  The Yanks do it, and it seems to work for them.  I guess you can tell I'm a Brit who wants a republic, but I wouldn't replace the queen with a president, just keep the role of PM
1039024
well ----------She will be in the throne as long as there are fools who believe in this system!!!!!!!!--keep in mind that most kings and queens auto nominated themselves for this position ...and they impose themselves upon the people back then you had no choice now you do----but after  all let them believe in their fairy tales 'cause that is what ther are now !!!
512944
A very convinient accident. If she didn't die then, I'm pretty sure she would have been assassinated. She was too damn nice for the royal family.
362660
Depends, IN America, the head of state is President. He hold the final power of desicion making. He is the head of legislative and excutive.\nIN ENGLAND, the head of state is Prime Minister, he take all the meetings working, and give information to his King(Queen). Prime Minister make the desicion, but act under the signature of QUEEN. Prime Minister is head of excutive not the head of legislative.
410396
England -- because the Queen will behead them if they don't!
673863
well i am not a very big supporter of monarchy no matter whatever country it is in.\nbut you guys in britain should be glad that your royal family atleast doesnt messes with the government and its running.\n\nthough i agree with you that spending so much money on the royal family serves no purpose but sometimes somethings are just part of your history and you cant do away with them.\n\nmaybe you could try abolishing the monarchy after her death.
912650
There isn't one.  Tony Blair is the Prime Minister of Britain.  Jack McConnell is the First Minister of Scotland and under the present constitution there is no Prime Minister of England.
330681
The world would be a much better place. The US would no longer have those selfcentred presidents, they would speak correctly and we may even get them to write correctly. In fact the US should probably be allowed to vote to rejoin the United Kingdom. They just love the royal family and they all want to come and see the UK.\nBut we need to sort out the taxes before we allowed them back.