However, the biggest problem with a written constitution in my view is that what it means to be British is constantly changing.

[...] July 2, 2007 at 1:57 pm | In Barnett formula, Alex Salmond, Referendums | Anthony Barnett (London, OK): I have just been sent a thoughtful warning for me not to answer my front door: “the new Prime [...]

[...] Dyspeptic White July 4, 2007 at 4:42 pm | In Uncategorized | Anthony Barnett (London, OK): I spotted the Guardian’s political editor strikingly well dressed in a suit nearly as [...]

[...] July 8, 2007 at 2:02 pm | In Avaaz, Enlightenment, America | Anthony Barnett (London, OK): Before joining millions around the world at an Avaaz organised LiveEarth barbeque, in my case [...]

[...] of change over the last two months. After the first seminar I breached the Chatham House rules by publicising in OK that Jack Straw said he had changed his mind on a written constitution. This time Dominic [...]

[...] | In Constitutional convention, Guardian, Bill of Rights, Human Rights | Anthony Barnett (London, OK): The Guardian’s editorial this morning on civil liberties ends with a resounding call to arms, [...]

[...] Task Force alert June 4, 2007 at 1:10 pm | In Conservative Party | Anthony Barnett (London, OK): Today’s Daily Mail reports that this week will see the Conservative Party announce  “The [...]

[...] and Freedom of Information May 22, 2007 at 3:45 pm | In Parliament, Freedom of Information | Our Kingdom: This letter has been sent to their colleagues by Labour MPs by Tony Lloyd, Angela Eagle, Kevan [...]

[...] or trust ourselves? May 21, 2007 at 3:36 pm | In Uncategorized | Anthony Barnett (London, OK): Trust was a shaping issue for New Labour. Those who created it believed that their party had [...]

[...] and secret corners” May 18, 2007 at 5:25 pm | In MPs, Freedom | Anthony Barnett (London OK): Who said that? In 1992, when he first spoke about Freedom of Information, (see below) Gordon [...]

[...] week, Jack Straw became (apparently) the first serving Cabinet Minister to say that he was in favour of a written constitution (at a Smith Institute [...]

Jake Anders (Salisbury): The suggestion is that a written constitution will encourage good citizenship at a time when the country as a whole is going through a debate as to what it actually means to be British. Moreover, if written well it will help enshrine many civil liberties that are being eroded in the present political climate. The right to trial by jury and habeas corpus have been threatened and in some cases removed in recent years. Putting them in a constitution would afford some protection to stop this happening, though a constitution can always be changed.

However, the biggest problem with a written constitution in my view is that what it means to be British is constantly changing. This is why we are debating what it means to be British, it’s clearly not the same as it was during the 19th Century. So fixing us with today’s values and systems would make the UK less dynamic, flexible and able to change when it will need to.

Rob Hopcott (London, ipg): Let's have included in any written constitution the right by the public to have a direct say in their own government through e-democracy.

Official Downing Street discussion forums where the public could use their collective intelligence to genuinely solve the big issues of today, including any written constitution, are technically simple and long overdue.

Unfortunately, it is likely that the Government's idea of a written constitution is just another opportunity to tell us how the Government thinks we should behave. In other words, obligations not rights.

Let's get tough on the causes of bad government which, in most cases, is all about not listening to the people.

[...] to Open Democracy Our Kingdom Jack Straw leader of the House of Commons and Gordon Brown’s campaign manager has come out for a [...]

Roger Smith (London - Justice) The value of a written constitution is well demonstrated by the work of Professor Bogdanor's students in drafting one to reflect current circumstances. This is published as an appendix to the Smith Institute Book 'Towards a Constitutional Settlement' which was launched at the conference where Jack Straw spoke. The draft provides a comprehensive and comprehensible picture of the distribution of power in the UK. The demand for a written constitution may provide the necessary momentum for reform in a number of key areas that are crying out for it. After all, there is not much point in a written constitution which does not settle the position on such tricky issues as the House of Lords and devolution, at least for a generation. We may end up with a series of mini-constitutions or memoranda on separate issues, such as the one negotiated by Lord Woolf on the relationship between the judiciary and the executive. These won't, as Robert Hazell rightly says, solve everything, and they may not be complete - at least for some time. But they might help us update a constitution where the powers of the feudal Crown can still be traced and where our form of Parliamentary democracy is vulnerable to the charge of morphing into elective dictatorship.