Internet dialogues
5.30 The Internet is a tool which can be
used to enable consultation, in any of the modes described above,
to escape from the confines of place. It also permits a form of
consultation which may be distinguished from other modes, and
which may be termed an "Internet dialogue" or "Internet
forum". An Internet dialogue may be closed to a selected
list of participants; or it may be open to anyone with Internet
access. As access increases, Internet dialogues look set to become
an increasingly powerful tool for direct public consultation.
5.31 Internet dialogues are cheap and easy
to run for anyone with the necessary technology, and there are
no doubt more in progress than anyone knows. POST has organised
two in the last year in collaboration with the Hansard Society:
one on the Data Protection Act; the second on the experiences
of women in higher education (QQ 842-910). The House of Commons
Select Committee on Public Administration, which is currently
inquiring into innovations in citizen participation in government,
has commissioned the Hansard Society to conduct an Internet dialogue
on this subject.
5.32 In spring 1998 Professor Steve Fuller
of Durham University organised a Global Cyberconference on Public
Understanding of Science, as part of the ESRC Public Understanding
of Science Programme. On the basis of this experience, Alan Irwin
and Peter Healey observe (p 31) that the Internet is a popular
medium; it enables a lot of responses to be collected quickly,
and analysed using search engines; and it combines the advantages
of rapid exchange of ideas (brainstorming) with a complete record.
On the other hand, participation is self-selecting and unrepresentative;
and the anonymity of the Internet can "encourage impulsive
rather than considered responses". It may also be observed
that this anonymity makes it difficult to investigate the provenance
of information, and therefore difficult to weigh it; this militates
against public confidence.
5.33 The RCEP comments (SES 7.30) that the
quality of information and debate on the Internet is often low,
and participants may have little confidence that views expressed
this way make a difference. These problems may be diminished if
the "moderator" of the dialogue has a sufficiently high
profile.
5.34 Our attention has been drawn to research
by Professor Andrew Graham, of Oxford University[46],
into the possibilities presented by the advent of digital TV.
It is believed in some quarters that digital TV linked to the
Internet will make possible undreamed-of levels of participatory
democracy. Professor Graham sees problems down this road. First,
TV is susceptible to undue concentration of ownership; and new
scope for monopoly power will arise from the need for an "electronic
programme guide" as the gateway to digital channels and services.
Second, "Touch-sensitive screens cannot be part of true participationAll
the true power lies with those who design the menus, not with
those who touch the screens". Professor Graham sees the answer
to the first of these problems in regulation in the public interest,
and to the second in the preservation of a public service element
in broadcasting and the cultivation of "trusted third parties".
5.35 The use of the Internet in the ways
discussed here is very new, and will need to be evaluated when
more experience has been gained. We would merely observe that,
for electronic dialogue to be orderly and to produce useful results,
there needs to be a robust moderator and a clear set of rules
for participants.
Foresight
5.36 A consultation of a different kind
is the Government's Foresight programme. This was inaugurated
by Realising our Potential in 1993, and known originally
as Technology Foresight. The purpose of Foresight is to look at
the future in a systematic way and develop a vision for different
sectors of society and the economy. In April 1999 a programme
was launched that would look at three themes which were:
and ten different sectors of the economy. Each panel
would consider education, skills and training, plus sustainable
development. Each panel is supported by task forces which look
in more detail at specific areas. In addition associate programmes
undertaken by professional institutions and research and technology
organisations work within the framework of the national programme
to investigate the future of a particular topic. All this work
will be fed into a pool of knowledge from which individuals and
companies can draw a vision of the future relating to their work
or business.
5.37 The purpose of the exercise is to provide
people with a coherent and unified view as to what the future
will look like; to inform people about change; to prepare them
for it; and to help them to cope with it. It is an ambitious programme
and of course it is too early to say how effective it will be.
Although the process of Foresight is fairly open, in practice
those consulted represent expert communities rather than the public
at large.
44 Managing Director of the Science Policy Support
Group and co-ordinator of the ESRC Public Understanding of Science
Programme. Back
45
HL Paper 26 1998-99, Q 1305. Back
46
Policies for Participation, in Communication, Citizenship,
and Social Policy, ed. Calabrese and Burgelman, Rowman &
Littlefield (USA) 1997. Back
