How many of you know that during the recent British elections on May 5th, the people of Sedgfield had the power to unseat Tony Blair as prime minster if they wished? You see the thing with the British government is that it functions as a parliamentary democracy, where sole authority comes from Westminster. Sedgefield is one little constituency out of more that 650. To show the problem with this, allow me to explain to you the process of how the British government is formed.

Whenever there is an election every five years (but it can be called before if the Prime Minister wishes), the 650+ seats in the House of Commons are up for grabs. On election day, the British public vote for any of the candidates who want to represent their constituency. For example, if I were a resident of Blackburn, I would vote for one of the candidates (who could be a member of any political party) running to represent Blackburn as a constituency in the House of Commons. Thus, I don't vote directly from the Prime Minister.

Once the election is over, the political party who obtains the most seats in the Commons gets to form the next government. There are instances when no party obtains a majority and thus, a 'hung parliament' is declared. In that case a coalition government will have to be formed (most likely, the Liberal Democrat Party will work with the Labour Party and keep the Conservatives out of the government). The leader of the party with the majority of the seats, so along as he or she has won a seat, gets to become the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister will then appoint other MPs to take up portfolios in the cabinet.

So you see, all these people in Tony Blair's cabinet, including the Prime Minister himself, have to win seats. Had Tony Blair lost in Sedgfield, he could not have returned as Prime Minister. Similarly, if Jack Straw had lost in Blackburn, he could not have returned as Foreign Secretary. So I think its a bit funny how one small group of people, as oppose to the entire country, has the power remove a major figure from office.

Another problem I see deals with accountability. Let's say for example that your MP is from the Labour Party and you support him because he has done good things for you. Now let's say you very angry with whole fiasco of the Iraq War and you want to see the back of Tony Blair. However, you know that if you want Tony Blair out, you're going to need to vote against the MP whom you support; this is obviously a very big problem for you. You are, in reality, voting against your conscience.

One last major problem is the House of Lords- members of the British nobility who are simply appointed by the Prime Minister, not elected, and who are entrusted with power to vote on certain bills that relate to the lives of ordinary people. Now I know that in order for a bill to become an act (as long as it does not relate to money), it must be approved by both Houses. Hence, I realize that the House of Lords will not support a bill that will terminate their status. Here's my proposal (make sure no peer reads this article before my proposal succeeds). Get an MP to propose a bill that allows the government to call for a national referundum on certain issues (this may already exist, but I can't bee too sure). The House of Lords will have to support it since they can't be seen to look down upon the people's right to rule. After it receives royal assent from the Queen, call for a referundum to dismantle the House of Lords. Now, the government may receive lots of money from these guyz, but never fear, you can always use Iraqi oil as a surrogate.