As the news informs us that MPs have decided not to allow us a democratic vote on the Lisbon Treaty...

My We The People column, now up at the Wardman Wire:

Jack Straw is hinting that the government wants to draw up a written Constitution for the UK, with a process that could take up to 20 years. But why does Straw want to do this? Because

most people might struggle go put their finger on what [their] rights are or in which texts they are located. The next stage in the UK's constitutional development is to look at whether we need better to articulate those rights which are scattered across a whole host of different places and indeed the responsibilities that go with being British... [And to] bring us in line with most progressive democracies around the world.

But why on earth does this mean that we should have a written Constitution?!

What Is A Constitution?

A constitution is basically the rules by which the democratic system of the nation state is run. Th is can either by an "unwritten", though in reality this more means "uncodified", constitution which relies on accepted conventions in order to run or a formalised, written Constitution.

Britain has an uncodified constitution, not an unwritten one. Pretty much every bit of it exists written down, in documents such as the Magna Carta, the 1689 Bill of Rights, and the Parliament Acts. The British constitution also exists in every single piece of legislation ever passed by Parliament, since there is no division between primary and secondary legislation. It also exists in common law, treaties with foreign powers, and analaysis and commentary made by experts [such as Bagehot]. But it also exists in conventions, which guide the way in which the system works - one convention being the role of Prime Minister.

America is the prime example of the written Constitution. It has a piece of paper which lists the rights and responsibilities of Americans, and is very hard indeed to modify. These kind of Constitutions are typically created after war or revolution, in order to satisfy the populace that their rights are defended.

The Wardman Wire has seen some very good articles over the past week on the subject of MPs and the money they claim, both as salary and expenses. It's not my intention to weigh in on that debate, but use the opportunity to examine the role of MPs in our democracy.

Another instalment of my We The People column over at Wardman Wire. I'm delaying what had been intended to be the first posts for this column yet again because this story caught my eye, and I felt in the mood to write about it. So here it is:

It's a week earlier, and on a different topic, than I had intended, but here is my first We The People column for the Wardman Wire, on the recent problems in Kenya and Pakistan:

What could be called crises of democracy has occurred in Kenya and Pakistan, both accompanied by bursts of violence - one caused by the assassination of an opposition political leader, and another by alleged and suspected electoral fraud. Neither of these countries have a highly developed or deeply-embedded democracy, and are still riven by tribal differences. Fifty Kenyans have died in a torched church - a place normally regarded as a safe-house - because they were members of the same tribe as the President.

But are there really crises of democracy in these two countries?

I thought that I would write a bit more about my new bi-weekly column starting in the new year: We The People. Even though I haven’t had the opportunity to actually start writing it yet! ...

The basis of We The People will be democracy - in theory and in practice. I am going to try and look at different democratic and governmental systems and analyse them together and in comparison with each other and in relation to the next section of this post...

As announced earlier by Matt, starting in the new year the I will be starting a new bi-weekly column at the Wardman Wire focusing on Democracy, both as a theory and in practice, in January. New year, new column.

As Matt says: