The Prime Minister should be elected by the country as a whole, not just members of the ruling party. Worse than that, it is to possible have a person who was never elected by anyone to lead his/her party, then go on to lead (or otherwise) the country. This is a travesty of democracy and possibly one of the main reasons why we are all getting so incensed by the whole political scene.
We need to recapture the licence by which politicians rule us and guard it jealously.

While I see the principle here we have to say that whatever the public perception we do not elect a Prime Minister! We elect a local MP it is then up to the Queen to invite the leader of the largest party in parliament to form a government. The leader of that party becomes Prime Minister.

The dicotomy here is that ordinary voters do not (and should not) elect the leader of a party.

So if we are going to insist that the change of Party Leader means a General Election why not go the whole hog and have a presidential style election?

Yes, we vote for our preferred party. I feel we have to accept that leaders of a party may change. As long as we do have regular general elections, we can vote for a new party. A change of leadership is just a risk we take. A complete change in policy by a party while in term is not desirable, but a risk we take.

Sorry to rock the boat but I have a small reservation about the idea of an automatic General Election if the PM changes. This might follow the sudden resignation or death of the PM and there should surely be a period of reflection before a general election is called. Most certainly it should be within one year although three months should be enough to allow the new PM to establish his credentials and to avoid the disruption of government. An immediate election at a difficult time (war, Christmas) could be very damaging to the country.

The principle is sound, though, and the Broon farce with his only ever vote being in some faraway Scottish constituency of a few thousand people who have their own parliament anyway is an absolute nonsense.

Traditionally governments have a Deputy Prime Minister. The simple solution to this dichotomy is to insist that if the Prime Minister steps down or is otherwise removed from office that only the Deputy can assume that office without calling a General Election. After all, if the party in government don't have confidence in the Deputy to perform the duties of the office it's only right and proper that they consult the electorate.

I agree with the sentiments of Tony Mott and Hideous Dwarf and would add that the benefit of enforcing a general election within a specified timescale after a change of Party Leader is that it would hone the minds of the political parties to select who they think would be the most suitable leader for the country and not necessarily the most 'convenient' for the political party itself.