One of local e-democracy's leading proponents, Cllr Mary Reid, Chair of the Local e-Democracy National Project, talks to eGov monitor about the challenges, opportunities and risks of e-Democracy.
Cllr Reid's comments are solely in her capacity as a local councillor.
What do you think the impact of the internet has been so far, as a tool for democratic renewal and community engagement in the UK?
There are many interesting projects, both from the National Project and outside, and each has had its own local impact. The evaluation studies of the National Project pilots have made an initial assessment of impact. Our general view is that we have to start with relatively small projects, evaluate them and then gradually extend them to other councils. Small pilots which can be rolled out are much better than large unwieldy projects.
|
Citizens are generating the demand - councils need to be able to listen and respond
|
I can mention some specifics – consultation tools, issues forums, councillor blogs, personalisation tools and email/SMS alerts, use of the BBC ActionNetwork, interactive webcasting, online chatrooms, etc – these have all created excitement and interest.
It is very difficult to make an overall assessment. Probably the most significant impact of the Internet has been in the informal networks and shared knowledge that it supports. This is impossible to quantify. The National Project is encouraging local authorities to engage better with citizens, but it is the underlying culture of openness that the Internet generates that will have the greatest impact. Citizens are generating the demand and local authortities need to be able to listen and respond.
How can we ensure that those who lack ICT skills can take part in e-Democracy?
I rather think this is asking the wrong question, as it implies that the intention is to switch all democratic activity to online methods. In fact, e-democracy adds extra channels to existing communication methods and should always be seen as a supplement not a replacement. E-democracy tools have the potential to increase access, as they can reach people who do not engage through the traditional means. I am particularly thinking of three groups – young people, technology-dependent disabled and commuters. All three groups are already active users of the e-channels.
|
The digital divide is no reason not to explore e-democracy's potential
|
Voter apathy is a concern in UK democracy. Do you think e-democracy can help cross the barrier imposed by public cynicism and apathy to revitalise democracy in the UK?
Invigorating local democracy is a huge agenda, but I'm a great believer in starting with small local actions, analysing their effects and then creating excitement around them so that others want to try them out as well.
I was drawn into politics through the Liberals' development of 'pavement politics' in the 70s and their commitment to empowering citizens. Pavement politics meant both pounding the streets and dealing with very local issues, such as broken paving stones. It was essentially about the decisions affecting the day-to-day lives of people. At the same time I believe that citizens should be given the skills and knowledge to enable them to find their own solutions to problems – whether by simply finding out who to phone at the Council, or by mounting their own campaigns to get things changed.
|
Governments cannot control grassroots activity, but they can help it to flourish
|
What would you consider to be the biggest success of the e-Democracy National Project so far and why?
It's difficult to pick out specific projects as many of them have been very successful. So perhaps our main success has been in raising awareness with local authorities about the importance of strengthening democratic processes. The heavy emphasis on the transformation of business practices in through e-government, welcome as it has been, did seem to overlook the fact that local authorities are not just public service providers but are a layer of government. E-democracy initiatives emphasise the governance issues and the accountability of elected representatives and officers to local citizens.
Obviously, there is a lot more to be done to ensure active citizenship in UK and the E-Democracy National Project is coming to an end in the near future. How would you like to see the work of the project be sustained to ensure democratic renewal in the UK?
|
E-democracy is raising awareness of citizen power
|
There are ongoing discussions about how the work will be carried forward when the National Project comes to an end in March 2006. This is a long term agenda and it needs to be integrated into the 10-year strategy for local government. As citizens become aware of the potential of e-democracy I hope it will begin to generate its own momentum, with the demand coming from them. In my own council of Kingston upon Thames, we have had a participatory and very localised style of government for many years – certainly pre-dating any e-democracy activity – and now the citizens take it for granted that they will be consulted on everything and that they can get their concerns heard. It can sometimes be uncomfortable for councillors like me, but it's democracy!
What e-democracy is doing is raising awareness of the power that citizens do have and can take. It gives them tools that they can then use. Democratic renewal can spread through the many networks and organisations that make up civil society.
What role should the major political parties be playing in promoting citizen engagement in public discourse?
|
Political parties haven't yet worked out how localism should impact on their main websites
|
The National Project has a member of each of the three main parties on the Board. Our role is twofold - first to ensure that the concerns of elected representatives as a whole are understood, and second to work within our own parties to raise the issue. For myself, I have been actively involved in my own party on participation issues. We were the first party to use the Internet for public (ie open and not just closed to members) debate on policy development. We also have clear commitments to local participation. But there is more to be done. The parties themselves have all been experimenting with e-democracy tools both for internal and external communications. There were some interesting developments during the General Election with the appearance on the party websites of blogs, webcasting, games and personalisation, and with the use of email and SMS alerts, viral emails and even podcasting. They are all good at engaging their members and activists through email, and they provide a rich online environment for people who are already interested. But they are all only just beginning to explore how they can engage with the rest of the population. And none of the parties has yet worked out how the shift to localism should impact on their main websites.
You can read Cllr Reid's weblog at the ReadMyDay project, one of over 20 pilots initiated by the Local E-Democracy National Project.
