Anthony Barnett (London, OK): Just in time for the collapse of New Labour in a cloud of double-dealing, the escutcheon of Charter 88 has been hammered to the wall of a new campaign for democratic reform, Unlock Democracy, as Peter Facey reports. By coincidence Robin Wilson who was a mover and shaker of Northern Ireland's Democratic Dialogue, in a very nice tribute to Stuart Weir and me, looks back across almost two decades ago to the establishment of Charter 88. He lists more achievements than I might claim,

John Jackson (London, Mishcon de Reya & Unlock Democracy): The Hunting Act, a controversial statute dealing with a controversial topic and imposed by the House of Commons in a controversial way, continues to generate important constitutional questions as it is challenged in the courts. These now include the role of judges, the legality of parliamentary sovereignty as it currently exists and the future of our constitution itself.

Jon Bright (London, OK): There are two ways of approaching the problem of gun control. One is to argue that responsible adults can be mature enough to look after a gun, know what its proper place is, and can understand just how dangerous and powerful a tool a gun is. The other is to argue that guns are simply too dangerous, that the public can never be trusted to responsible with them, and they will either cause harm accidentally, or will be wilfully misused for criminal purposes, and therefore people cannot be allowed to possess them. The first puts faith in the capacity of humans to regulate themselves and take responsibility for their actions. The second puts faith in the state to regulate our environment and look after our well being. I'm glad, on the issue of gun control at least, in the UK we have the latter, with all but a few small exceptions.

Andrew Blick (London, Democratic Audit): The House of Commons European Scrutiny Committee has issued a further report (opens pdf) on the EU Reform Treaty. The committee has become increasingly critical of the government over this issue of late. There has been a breakdown in relations between the two, partly because Margaret Beckett, when Foreign Secretary, refused to hold a meaningful discussion with it over the planned UK barganing position in negotiations leading to the treaty, nor would she provide it with relevant information. The Committee is calling, not unreasonably, for a debate on the floor of the House about jurisdiction in justice and home affairs before the treaty is signed. No doubt the content of the committee's report will be seized on by those seeking to rubbish the integration project as a whole. Perhaps the lesson for the government here is that it is better to involve Parliament properly and early in major issues of diplomacy, in order to avoid disputes further down the line. When framing its proposals for involving the legislature in treaty ratification, it should take this requirement into account.

Anthony Barnett (London, OK): No, not Hilary, but her husband whose first name escapes me at the moment. I was never very taken with him, positively or negatively. Way back in 92 when I was in the States I watched him debating for the White House with George Bush Senior and Ross Perot in a TV designed 'town hall' meeting. He struck me as fluent, with the popular touch and as, well, an American politician after office. He got it too, because Perot split the right. Better a Democrat than a Republican, but I neither found him hateful, as did fellow Brits on the left like Hitchens or Cockburn, or wonderful - many pinged to his charisma but it bounced off me with indifference and thus it remained. So I was surprised, yesterday, leaving through a 40th anniversary edition of Rolling Stone full of unexceptional interviews, to find one with Clinton where he made me think. He says that the three great issues of our time are "inequality, sustainability and identity". None of the Blairite cliches about terrorism that I'd have expected. Instead, the issue of extremism is neatly tied up in his last 'ity' but also connected to the many national and religious movements that are on the move and of which terrorism is indeed an expression. Naturally, I don't go for identity politics. As the late, great and much missed Mai Ghoussoub wrote, what matters is background. But for a three word overview of what matters now, it was neat. Can anyone better them?

Jon Bright (London, OK): Brown's slow train-wreck of a government is now piling on the negative headlines at such a rate that it is easy to lose count of some of them (I think Jacqui Smith in particular must be feeling a whole lot more secure about now). The Watt/Abrahams affair is a disaster that has been covered so well by other blogs (particularly Guido) that there seems little point me trying to add anything. So instead I'll try and give a little publicity space to another, rumbling problem, which will probably not be as politically damaging for Brown's government but certainly has a far greater potential to impact on our lives.

Anthony Barnett (London, OK): Excellent article by Christina Zaba of No2ID in the Guardian today on how the ID Cards Act became law in 2006 as part of the Blair and now Brown policy of 'Transformational Government' - for more on this mouthful you can go to the horse's mouth itself HERE.

Anthony Barnett (London, OK): Both Mike Smithson at PoliticalBetting and James Forsyth at the Spectator are very taken with Jackie Ashley's column in the Guardian on the fate of Brown and whether he will last until the next election.

Alice Casey & Laurie Waller (London, involve): Parliament: a place where tribal division, tradition and white men have created and established our entrenched political culture. A place which has decisively shaped the public's idea of what ‘politics' is. A place from which there is now an emerging awareness that such a form of rule, rooted in staid tradition and models of power, no longer effectively serves the public on which its legitimacy rests.