I've always thought of the British constitution as being like a block of fine sandstone. Looks nice on the outside, but is actually composed of all the muck that sinks to the bottom, and covers what was there before.

Simply writing down the mess that already exists would be a lost opportunity.

For a different take on this subject and for a response to the JUSTICE report on a British Bill of Rights follow this link: http://cornishstannaryparliament.co.uk//resources//article.php?story=2008020519573245

I also heard this piece on Radio 4 this morning. He was using guarded and equivocal terminology.

This process might take a long time - he mentioned a 10-20 year timeframe

This process might end up with a bona fide written constitution or it might not.

On a positive note at least we seem to be moving on the right path but I remain deeply sceptical about the identity and motives of those controlling the pace and direction of this entire process.

A written British constitution provides a vehicle for lasting solutions to many of the ills currently bedevilling the UK's democratic and political landscape. Used constructively it could form the basis of a meaninfgul engagement with the entire British public about how we (those residing in the UK) wish to be governed and the true nature of our rights and responsibilities as individual citizens.

Formally defining the nature of the relationship between citizen and state and limits of each party in that contract can only have a profoundly positive impact upon our governance.

This story is set to run and run..........