who rules england? queen elizabeth or the prime minister Blaire?
491104
The Leader of the Party that commands a majority in House of Commons or more accurately the Member that commands/appears to command the majority support in afore-said House.\n\nThe Rt Hon Anthony Blair is that person. The Queen's power is limited, in fact she gets the door slammed in Her face every time she visits Parliament and has to knock 3 times before it is opened.
871338
The Queen of England is much richer than either of them. She owns extensive land and things such as jewels etc which are priceless. That is apart from her monitary assets.
813873
PM Blair would have far better tastes....\nBut, on the other hand, if it WERE true, Bush would make a hell of a biatch if he weren't bum ugly.\nPoetic justice, too. Bushbaby getting the bumming he has given the rest of the world.\n--CJ "The Cheeky Lad"
1140092
This sentence is standard english.  \n\nSo is the Queen.
134023
when the queen of England dies, ;next in line will be prince Charles, and next will be his son.... so a king will soon rule England
31349
It would be a country: England
802607
PM = Jens Stoltenberg (Labour Party).\nKING = King Harald
723733
Tony Blair and George ush could earn more in directorships in companies if they liked they are in it for power.  Bush was already minted as most of the world leaders are before they get into the job.\n\nthe queen is a different story.  she is just a custodian.  She would be aswell having nothing.
225781
i live in Canada, and i know i don't mind having a "queen".  she doesn't make any governmental decisions, so it doesn't affect much in the country. all she seems to do is make occasional visits and pose for our money.  i think i might actually like it more, at least she is a permanent figure head, our prime ministers seem to change every couple of years.
428671
Queen Elizabeth II became queen in 1952 upon the death of her father King George VI. She was the eldest child and so was the next in line for the throne. Her uncle Edward VIII has previously been king but had abdicated because he wished to marry a divorced woman and this was not allowed. Upon Edward's abdication George became king as he was the next in line.
815632
Yes, she is "the rightful" Queen of England.  No one can lay claim to her throne.  No one in her own family can touch the throne because of her direct descent from Queen Victoria to her father King George VI.  During the Coronation, with all the major heads of the European and Asian nobility there, she was declared the Rightful and Just, true Queen of England, the United Kingdom, etc.  No one interjected or tried to usurp her throne which had been in her family since at least the early 1800's.  If they haven't done it in 200 years now, I think her jobs safe.  Not to mention she was related to everyone there.\n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_titles_and_honours_of_Elizabeth_II_of_the_United_Kingdom
1157342
Canada is a Monarchy, Head of state is the Monarch\n( H. M. Queen Elizabeth II, The Queen of Canada),\nMr. Harper is just the federal Prime Minister.
1179611
That would be the Queen herself
858950
Queen Elizabeth is the head and the caribou side is the tail.
624260
I would say George W Bush, but I know some Americans are going to have a go at me if I do. Apparently it's fine for Americans to have it in for their own president, but not for an English person to. I also don't like the smarmy British Prime Minister Tony Blair.
921765
The Monarchy serves as head of State in Great Britain (which includes England, Scotland and Wales), and Northern Ireland as well as several Commonwealth Countries, including Canada, Australia and several others.  Technically, the monarch is also the head of government as well (by constitution) but by tradition, it has evolved that the Prime Minister is head of government and the monarch is head of state.  The current monarch is Queen Elizabeth II, and she performs some of the same functions as the President of the United States as head of state (as opposed to head of government) which would include many ceremonial functions, as well as proclaiming bills into law.  It offers a different form of "checks and balances" that isn't available under the US system.  For instance, should a US President should fall as head of government, the head of state is also gone and government comes to a halt. In Britain, should the government fall, the monarch can come forward and ask another party to form government or call a general election.  If it is the former, then government can continue as before.  In countries like Canada (where I am), the monarch is represented  by the Governor General at the Federal Level, and the Lieutenant Governor at the Provincial Level (as opposed to a Lt Gov in the states, which is the state equivalent to a VP).  The person holding those offices perform the monarch's duties in its stead at the appropriate level of government.
423762
She is the head of state of more than 70 different countries around the world.  Quite honestly, she is the most powerful person on the planet.  The commonwealth of Great Britain means that the Queen is the top official of countries like England, Scotland, Australia, even India.  If she so wanted, she could dissolve every single government she is the head of and replace the leaders with a person of her choosing.  This happened in Australia in the 1970's when the Governor General, a subordinate to the queen dissolved parliament.  She wouldn't of course, but she could, and that's what's scary about countries still flying under the monarchy.\n\nMore typically, she's the repersenative for gifts from other countries, represents England at formal ceremonies, bestows the status of knight (sir), etc.