Brexit won't be over for decades
but lets start with:
1 - a crackdown on fake news
2 - better public education on politics
3 - mandatory independent fact checks on all political claims by politicians and the media
4 - ban on politicians having any other paid or advisory jobs while serving - especially in the media
5 - ban on all political donations unless from a verified named government gateway user/individual and UK taxpayer.
When MPs resign or are sacked from their party there should be an immediate by-election. The same individual can stand under their new party or as an independent but the previous party can also field their own candidate.England should have its own national assembly like the other UK countries
Couldnt that be just English MPs voting on English only issues rather than having a separate assembly?A written constitution must be constructed and approved by the people defining how the MPs, Peers,Monarch and the Judiciary shall interact and which has final sovereignty
As long as that written constitution has no role for the monarchy.Members of the House of Lords must be replaced by elected peers in future
The question is do we really need a second chamber at all. Although most democracies do have a system with two chambers. It does tend to be a more moderate solution.UK Parliaments both central and devolved must have the fundamental goal of being co-operative rather than confrontational
No idea how this could be legally phrased or really why it is really necessary. If separate chambers have to agree or compromise then there isn't really any point in local assemblies as they would not be truly independent. The better move is simply to ensure that the responsibilities of each group is clearly defined.Proportional representation must replace our first past the post system to better reflect the views of the people even if that means more coalitions
I am somewhat on the fence about this as there are pros and cons.People no longer want to be led by Parliament but want to direct it more. For example by more referendum and/or decision making using IT applications
Absolutely the last thing that I want. I have more faith in representative politicians than I do in the general public. I think too often the public would do no more than respond in a knee jerk fashion, especially on emotive issues.
For example, when Tony Martin was convicted for shooting and killing a burglar there was an upswing in people wanting the law changed to permit what he did. Even though in my view it was correct to sentence him in his case. For example, he had an illegal firearm, after the shooting he did not report it to police but disappeared (to dump the illegal gun), forensics proved he lied about events, etc. Many people simply didn't seem to know many of the facts about the case but still had a strong opinion about it and wanted the law changed.
Some things I would also want left under the control of people with more expertise. I remember a good case where a health authority in the US convened a public panel to decide on health priorities. That panel came to the conclusion that breast enlargements should have a higher treatment priority than broken limbs. For some reason they then decided not to follow the panels guidelines.
They’ve spent the last three years not being able to come up with Brexit between them, so what makes
then more qualified to make decisions about that, or anything else, than anyone else?
Question.Would a Direct Democracy have delivered the Good Friday Agreement? Would the public support talking to terrorists?What is popular is not always what is right.Diplomacy is not best served with group think or "common sense".
We should have a by election if a sitting MP changes party.
There needs to be a proper federal settlement, including a parliament for England. (Or England should go independent, though I accept there is little appetite for that currently).
The speakers role needs significant reform to address the blatant politicisation Bercow has brought in.
The HoL should be abolished and not replaced. Let's have a unicameral legislature.
We should abolish the monarchy if we can find a suitable model to replace it. I would not want anything like the US presidential model. I can't actually find a model I prefer, but I'm open to suggestions.
We should have a written Constitution that covers the previous points.
A Unicamel what? :image/gif;base64,R0lGODlhAQABAIAAAAAAAP///yH5BAEAAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAIBRAA7 
I think it means this.
Unicameralism - Wikipedia /proxy.php?image=https://en.m.wikipedia.org/static/apple-touch/wikipedia.png&hash=a5bdc80ff8601b9198ce49feeaff8390&return_error=1 en.m.wikipedia.org
But this would be good too....
https://www.pinterest.com/pin/146578162843683349/(Couldn't find one on a unicycle)
Thanks 
The present system is dire and has been for a very long time; it's the Brexit shambles which has exposed this all too clearly.
1. We currently elect individuals to represent us every 4/5 years. Those individuals are also representatives of their political Parties which may feature some policies we don't actually agree with. So who are we voting for - the person or the Party?
2. Pre-election pledges are all too easy - you can promise the earth but there's no mandatory requirement to actually have to fulfil those pledges. I would like there to be more realism where this is concerned (I also know this is highly unlikely).
3. There's an enormous disconnect between pre and post-election. Basically, the Parties are all over us like a rash before, but once they're incumbent they just ignore us as we are the little people and the great unwashed.
4. PMQ's is horribly stage managed and I look around the Chamber and I see a sea of old white men in dark suits. These people do not represent me and I would like to see more diverse representation.
5. There clearly needs to be more transparency and accountability in all areas of government. For example, why are utterly useless companies like Capita and Atos given massive public service contracts? What really happened with Carillion? Who makes these decisions and are they ideologically driven?
6. The London/Westminster bubble badly needs to be addressed. There's simply far too much emphasis on the financial sector, it's growth and importance, and not enough on other equally important areas of cultural life. "Wealth and prosperity" is all well and good, but it's what you do with that money which is of more significance.
7. I don't think MP's should be allowed to set their own pay nor expenses, this should be done independently. I also fail to see why a second rent-free home is a statutory requirement for all MP's, especially if they don't need it.
8. There's way too many vested interests when it comes to business decisions, there should be far more transparency where this is concerned.
9. Parliamentary select committees should do far more than just scrutinise and recommend, they should be given real powers to effect change. I also would like it that if people are required to appear in front of a committee, they can't just duck out.
10. My biggest bugbear: the Whips. Get rid of them because too many MP's are just following Party lines and not the wishes of their constituents.
11. Attendance rates during debates is fairly woeful; don't think for a moment that a packed Chamber during PMQ's is the norm, it is the exception. There should be a minimum requirement for MP's to attend and ask questions.
12. Adversarial politics is actually really depressing and dispiriting to witness. I am not impressed by point-scoring nor shouting down the opposition and would prefer to see more compromise and cooperation.
Oh, and I don't don't expect any of the above to happen. We rarely learn and we reluctantly change, alas.
If you get rid of whips then parties become pointless. Not saying that in itself is bad only that you can't really have parties without collective voting.And you can't have collective voting without a system that ensures compliance.