Who should take over from Blair?

Question

Do we want Gordon Brown to lead our country or is there someone else you'd prefer, Ken Livingstone perhaps?

Answer 1

Ronnie Corbette. He could have a little stool to stand on in Parliment....... no that big leather chair and he could tell his funny little rambling stories as answers.
Job done!

Answer 2

No we do not want or need Gordon Brown! Ken Livingstone? No way!! Conservatives? NO! So who is left? BNP? NO. United Kingdom Independence Party? Under the leadership of Nigel Farage,I would give it some serious thought!! BUT,as Tony Blair is still the Prime Minister,and the Labour Government likey to be there for another three years,there is not realistically much choice is there? Whatever, we, the public think, makes not one iota bit of difference. Ministers will no doubt vote on someone that is unacceptable to most of us!!! No-one in the Labour Government would get MY vote,so its all down to election time!!!!! As for Brown,I think he will be VERY BAD for the country,especially those of us that live in England!!!!!!

Answer 3

The present method of governing Britain is out of date


My idea is that we need a complete revamp in government. Not just change the people, but completely change the way we think about government.
When the current system of democracy was created the population of England was about a sixth of what it is now. So there were 659 MPs for about 10 million people, being a representation ratio of about 15000 to 1.

Now, we have 646 MPs, and about 60 million people giving a representation factor of about 93,000 to one.

So each person's representation has reduced by around 600%.
In other words, you now get about one sixth of the representation that a citizen in 1801 got. Another way of looking at this is to say that, in order to have the same level of representation that we had in 1801, we would need 3876 MPs.
This is obviously ludicrous. and is absolute evidence of a need for a change.

As the population has increased so dramatically, then the effectiveness and fairness of a central government has reduced.
What we now need is an increase in the power of local government, and a reduction in the power of central government.
I propose that we should bring back something akin to the parish councils. We should have constituencies of a maximum of 500 families. These constituencies should have total control over the lives of its constituents, with no interference from outside, They must provide all of their own facilities such as school, health care, pensions, police, ar anything which they feel that they need.
If they feel that they are too small for a particular project or service, then they negotiate with nearby constituencies to make suitable arrangements. There would be no higher level arbitrator. Full responsibility would rest at the local level.

The benefits of this are enormous. Firstly, everybody would know everybody else within a constituency, so when a problem arises it would be easy to get to the source, because it would be to everyone's benefit to do so. This alone would reduce terrorism and serious crime to a minimum. A sort of neighbourhood watch scheme in which everybody takes full part, and makes the decisions. The money presently spent on taxes, most of which disappears in red tape, civil servants' and MPs' salaries, waging war, and hundreds of other expenses from which the average citizen receives no benefit whatsoever, would be spent on directly benefiting the community, on projects voted for by the community.
It is most likely that taxes could be reduced to a fraction of what is presently paid, because all wastage would be readily identified. Everybody would participate in their own government, because they would be able to understand it, and would have a real voice.
There would be no need for secret services, or secrets of any kind, saving another fortune, and removing another load of confusion.

I'm sure you can identify many other benefits, and I'm also sure that any disadvantages could quickly be overcome.

Answer 4

Not Gordon Brown , he has already proved his attitude and opinion of the British People by Stealing their Pensions and Taxing the Nation (or most of us) virtually out of existence , if Brown suceeds Blair we can only expect more and more Theft of the nations wealth only to see it frittered away by a Government who couldn,t run a "One Ticket" Raffle. Taxation is a Drug to Brown as is Alcohol to an alcoholic , Cocaine to a drug addict and other addictions which afflict those caught in these situations , with the enormous damage being caused to others.

Answer 5

Dame Edna Everidge i know that strictly speaking she is not English but as a plus she is a Dame and there would be advantages in her leading our country for example people will find those house of commons programs interesting can you imagine the opposition heckling her shed hit them with her Gladiolas wouldn't have time to be plotting wars she` d be out looking for sequin dresses with big feathers and trying on new glasses and i cant imagine her being told what to do by George Bush or any one else in fact ill contact her agent so he can get her an audition

Answer 6

Robin Cook died a year ago so I suspect that may put him out of the running,

Ken Livingstone would be popular but is too old; the left candidate looks like being John McDonell but I would like to see Diane Abbott run

Answer 7

i wouldn't put Ken Livingstone in charge of a piece of paper the mans a cretin

Answer 8

I think Blair should take over from Blair. You won't know what you have until it's gone.
But since that guy mentioned Boy George...pick Pete Burns or George Galloway
lol

Answer 9

David Cameron!!

Answer 10

No,No,No,
take me as the next priminister!
I will take from the rich and give to the poor!
VOTE ROBIN HOOD