Anthony Barnett (London, OK): When Gordon's Green Paper came out and he asked for a national conversation there was no way you could respond to it as a citizen, no website or even an offer to 'park your view here'. In contrast the White paper from the Scottish Government calling for its national conversation on Scotland's future it concluded with a link to a web page for comments and feedback. This now provides both a blog and comments. We linked to and reported on in OK. I've pointed out the contrast to those close to the government - who smiled. So I was delighted to see a link to an official opportunity to participate. It is on the BBC page on the You and Yours phone-in with Michael Wills the Minister in charge of the national conversation. It says:
"To take part in this public consultation, you can send your comment to governance@justice.gsi.gov.uk".
That’s just an old-fashioned email address. So still no webpage. What happens next you you do email? I have emailed to ask and will let you know. But if you go to the Ministry of Justice website itself you would be very hard pressed to find anything on it at all that suggests it is hosting a conversation on the future of Britain and British democracy. If you can any official description on the web of what the government is up to, please let me know or send the link.
However good their intentions, public belief in Brown's proposals is already starting to go sour.
Take the the mis-named 'citizens juries'. I've already asked about them. At least Steve Doughty of the Daily Mail did some reporting on "the Prime Minister's pet project".
And the paper had an editorial that was short and to the point and is worth reading in full:
It sounded too good to be true when Gordon Brtown promised to set up 'citizens' juries' to keep him in touch with the views of ordinary Britons.
Did this mean the Government would suddenly start paying attention to our everyday concerns of the sort raised in the Daily Mail poll today?
Would he listen to the 83 per cent who believe Labour has failed to keep its pledge to be 'tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime'? Or to the 75 per cent who think too many people are migrating to Britain?
What about the majority who want an EU referendum? Or the 60 per cent who think they are not getting value for their council taxes? Or the 58 per cent who want the death penalty restored for terrorist murderers?
Would Mr Brown be noting their opinions - and acting on them? A likely story.
The Prime Minister's juries, it now emerges, will be entirely controlled by Government departments, which will select the subjects they discuss and chose which facts to lay before them.
Oh, and all their deliberations will be held in strict secrecy.
In short, anyone who believed that Mr Brown would even begin to close the gaping chasm between politicians and people is likely to be in for a rude shock.
When his juries sounded too good to be true, isn't that exactly what they were?
