Does the British Government work primarily for the interests of the British People?
956285
No it does not.\n\nThey really do not give a flying you know what for the British people.\n\nThey care more about foreigners than they ever will about the taxpaying man in the street.  \n\nYou only have to look at the homeless British families in B&Bs (while immigrants get council houses) to see this. \n\nOr the Paedophiles being given houses on estates full of kids.\n\nOr pensioners struggling to heat their homes while Immigrants drive round in big cars.\n\nThey ignored the 1000s of British people who marched at the Stop the War protests.
555798
They do not have to listen to the White House.  However, many interests coincide so it appears they listen to the White House more than is actual.  GB and USA have very close cultural and economic ties.  Probably more than GB and the rest of Europe.  Failing to take each others interests into account would not be wise.
513422
In the United States this is a Constitutional Republic, not a democracy.  This means that governmental actions are focused on not violating the rights of the ultimate minority, a single individual.  \n\nMost politicians clearly are, at the very least, aware of the majority of those who vote or fund their election and it shouldn’t be a surprise that they often respond to the perceive desires of such groups.  However, in application of the law the Constitution is a guiding factor in protection of individual rights.\n\nWhich countries take individual rights into consideration is dependant on how the various countries view the individual.  Is the government the servant of the people or, are the people the servant of the government.
739306
I believe there is an intrinsic connection between the UK, through people like Winston Churchill and others throughout history that gives  America, Canada, New Zealand, Australia , Scotland, Ireland, Wales and England an evolution towards justice and a sense of fair play.  It is NOT an achieved goal but a process that we can judge ourselves objectively and try to get better long into the future.
619604
No !\nIt is outdated and a waste of our public money now,\nAll they are now is a figure head of Britain without any powers they are a puppet monarchy.\nWe elect our own government without a say from the monarchy\nBut still our leaders out of respect have to ask the monarchy if it can dissolve Parliament. It is a Farce\nIn today's Britain we have enough people sponging off the state without a family that is so privileged that it doesn't know what it like to live month to month.\nIt is time that all this tradition is done away with once and for all.
347758
british goverment's, but it's just another lie.
809237
Becuase members of a parliament are elected by the people of that country. These people represent their supporters. So what the parliament decide is infact the will of the people.
989343
Yesterday's newspaper reported that it currently costs the British people $70 million dollars a year to maintain the Monarchy.\n\nConsidering the fact that the Monarchy plays no role in running the British Government, and makes no decisions or policy whatsoever, I think it's high time the British people dissolve the Monarchy and spend their money on ANYTHING better.\n\nPerhaps they should spend the money on paving the grass at Wimbledon with asphalt so they can finally have a more meaningful tennis tournament on hard-court that fairly decides the best player.
687156
It would lead only to more division in the society.Our govt. should go back from britishers divide and rule policy.It will only do harm to our country.
168268
Every man works according to his agenda what he says.Government is the result of people's consent. What you see on the surface, US government does all the things according to the its agenda.
126721
I would diagree that most non-US citizens do not like us. I agree that the ones that do not like us are the most vocal right now. We have a lot of work to do, but our policies haven't really changed in the last hundred years. \n\nAs far as my opinion on the government, I absolutely love it. There are many flaws with our current parties that control the government, but we can fix it once we decide that is really what we want to do.\n\nOur government has the most promise out of any government that I can see in the world today. I just look forward to the day that we live up to that potential.
173947
No- Technically the Queen is the head of State, but she has no real power.\n\nIn Britain, the power lies in Parliament. When a General Election is called(every 5 years) we elect in each constituency a Member of Parliament who sits in the House of Commons on that constituency's behalf. Then the party that has an overall majority of members there is entitled to form a government (currently the Labour Party). The leader of that party becomes the Prime Minister (Tony Blair) and he/she forms a Cabinet, which deals with all of the major responsibilities, and proposes bills to Parliament.
896076
you should be able to do a search on that pretty easily. I think the anti feds wanted a government like they had in britain. with kings and such so the constitution was against thier plan. it's like modern day socialist in america. everyone wants to be a socialist if they are the ones making the rules and determining pay, nobody wants to be at the bottom but when you feel you have a chance to be at the top you might push a little harder to rule others
816172
In the U.K. it should be a majority of all parties in both houses of parliament that should make the decision, and not just the government. The ordinary citizens do not always have all the required information due to secrecy laws.
994359
The People elect the Government\n\nBut the Government does not always reflect the will of the people\n\nAll part of a free republic
129026
The Sultans play more of a "ceremonial" role- Very similary to the Queen of England.  In England, parliment and the Prime Minister make the decions but the Queen and the Royal Family serve as a figure head.
553852
The "government" is nothing more that you and me and all of our neighbours.  The "government" has no obligation to achieve any specific social outcomes. Voters may elect representatives whose objective it is to pursue social engineering, but that does mean that it is the government's obligation.\n\nPersonally, I think the government's primary obligation is the safety and security of the citizens and to create a climate and atmosphere in which liberty prevails so that each person can work towards achieving their own vision of the good life.