Skip to main content
Menu

Web forum archive

Have your say: Speaker's Commission on Digital Democracy

This Speaker's Commission will explore how British democracy can meet the demands of the digital era and modern citizens; how to reconcile representative democracy with the technological revolution. Starting in 2014, it will consider innovations and report in early 2015.

John Bercow’s aim is to listen to the widest possible selection of ideas and voices. What do you think the Speaker’s Commission on Digital Democracy should consider?

Further Information

14 Contributions (since 29 November 2013)
Closed for contributions

Dissolution of Parliament

The dissolution of Parliament took place on Thursday 30 May 2024. All business in the House of Commons and House of Lords has come to an end. There are currently no MPs and every seat in the Commons is vacant until after the general election on 4 July 2024.

Find out more about:

This web forum is displayed for archive purposes and is no longer accepting public contributions. For queries relating to the content of this web forum, please contact the House of Commons Enquiry Service.

Total results 14 (page 1 of 2)

Pranaay KATKE

03 February 2014 at 20:40

Its a great decision, as a visionary artist, innovator, I see great potential in this movement. We are already a digitally democratic race. Looking forward.

David Horsley

01 February 2014 at 14:53

It seems to me that there are two basic problems with digital democracy. The first is getting am accurate and auditable system. We must be certain that the system is neither liable to error, nor to fraud on the part of manufacturers or administrators, nor to anyform of personation. This is not easy when individual votes must remain secret. The second is finding a way of guarding against bribery and coercion. The current polling booth was a way of ensuring that the voter could not prove to a candidate or even to a family member that he had voted the right way and so could be neither bribed nor coerced. The current system of postal voting already breaches this intention to an unacceptable degree, and widespread digital democracy where privacy could not be assured or required would make it farcical.

Joe Mitchell

28 January 2014 at 08:56

Parliament celebrates its 800th birthday in 2015 - is that right? About time it probably upgraded. I've written about a Parliament Everywhere here...http://joe-mitchell.com/parliament-everywhere/ Some of the questions are about what motivates people to take part in political debate, whether we're ready to move to a more flexible definition of 'representative' or whether MPs are ready to concede more power to their constituents, and whether having parliament as a single, fixed, physical location with the role of governance over a fixed demos/space, is democratically sustainable. But would be lovely to think you could throw some money at this and organise online and offline consultations. People do care. We're not happy with the status quo. Give us the chance to talk about how we would like to engage in governance and we will take it. Hopefully.

Robert Lowry

23 January 2014 at 17:13

Create a Virtual UK Constitution by setting up an accessible, searchable database of the key statutes, conventions, judicial decisions and treaties that make up the uncodified UK Constitution. @RobertMLowry

Gulay Icoz

17 January 2014 at 18:50

Hello, I like to know how I can get involved with the Speaker's Commision on Digital Democracy. I will be looking forward to hearing from you.

Edward

21 February 2014 at 12:54

Hi Gulay Icoz Watch this space - we will shortly be asking for evidence for the Commission. Meanwhile, you are welcome to post any thoughts you have about digital democracy.

Gareth Howell

06 January 2014 at 15:05

Considering that the take up of Television was 99.99% for some years, and now we have the digital gadgetry, which is surely taken up by almost as many and that it is interactive, powers that be seem to be particularly slow in using the gadgetry to provide a superior kind of democratic electoral procedure. The guru of course being a certain Mr Williamson of the Hansard society itself.

Tom Linton

04 January 2014 at 12:48

I work in the area of sustainability and e-democracy. The following link gives some of the issues on e-democracy that I have considered and worked towards answering. www.ethonomics.org/e-democracy/issues-for-the-speakers-commission Tom Linton Ethonomics www.ethonomics.org

Raymond G Green

30 December 2013 at 15:39

I am totally in support of this idea. I feel absolutely frustrated by this present form of 'democracy' which seems to ignore the wishes of the people in the closed Westminster Village. I have NEVER had a response to any of many emails to my own MP. I welcome to possibility, however remote, that it will be easier for the many disparate views of people to be recognised. Why do we need this constant adversarial schoolboy behaviour in Parliament. At times it is quite disgusting to see our representatives behaving with so little respect, such rudeness, across the chamber. Let us argue and debate but not like this. It is no wonder is it that people are turned off the whole process. I agree with the comments from others below.

Steve Sharp

24 December 2013 at 17:52

I was quite interested by the speaker's presentation on the Digital Democracy Commission and the questions that it raises. Personally I feel that if this is at heart an attempt to engage more closely the population and it's elected representatives then it is a good thing and should be explored fully. But I am concerned that for it's integration into our political system to succeed then we actually need to breed a new kind of politician, one that actually both listens to what the people are saying and, within reason, acts on their demands. At the end of the day what is the point of voting in a representative who, once elected, proceeds to follow their own agenda? I am 53 years old and I have seen governments come and go, promises made and broken, many grand ideas fall by the wayside and the increase of population control by the development of a culture of fear. There are many hard questions about honesty and accountability to be addressed before any new approach to the communication between the people of this country and it's representatives has any chance of showing an appreciable benefit to the country as a whole. So yes, explore new ways of communicating between Parliament and the population, but make them effective and not just another failure to understand who we are and who we want to be. Thank you.

sfk

10 December 2013 at 13:19

I was genuinely interested in the proposals which were both ambitious and forward-looking. Democracy 2.0 should also be an inclusive democracy. On reflection, I would ask if the Terms of Reference can include considering the following questions which are to ensure a Digital Democracy remains both inclusive and maintains integrity a) how can emerging technologies be employed to assist individuals with cognitive impairment or physical disabilities to actually exercise their right to vote in general and local elections? b) how can emerging technologies be employed to ensure the vote exercised by such individuals described earlier are through secret ballot? c) how can emerging technology permit individuals who are serving in the Armed Forces abroad, including those injured, be able to exercise their right to vote on the day of an election? I understand the Commission will take views in due course but I would hope there would particular effort made to seek the views of individuals with (progressive) disabilities themselves during the course of the inquiry. In particular, those who would become old enough to vote for a general election in 2020 who may provide the most helpful input into the use of adaptive technologies.

Total results 14 (page 1 of 2)