Contents |
Governments have posted the law and other relevant information online in order to allow citizens to access that information more easily. The Queensland and federal governments have made legislation, case law and other information available online (Coleman, 2004: 3). In addition to these changes an in an attempt to make citizens more interested in the democratic process, the British government and the Queensland government have both undertaken online consultations (Coleman, 2004: 3).
This type of consultation, undertaken in Britain, was viewed as a success, with more people becoming involved in the two test consultations than would have appeared in an actual consultation sitting in London (Coleman, 2004: 8). Similarly, the Queensland government has created an ‘e-petition’ program, which allows residents to register a petition online with a local member (Queensland Government, 2002: 1). The Queensland government also posts discussion topics online, which allow for discussion on matters of policy (Queensland Government, 2001: 1).
Online consultations could be included in the traditional model of parliamentary democracy. These online consultations would therefore not challenge traditional notions of democracy in any significant way, which research has shown is undesired by the majority of the public (Mercurio, 2002: 40). Online consultations would simply allow more access to governmental consultations than has been previously available, (Coleman, 2004: 9). Online consultations are more likely to be adopted than the more radical direct voting forms of e-democracy.
Current leader of the Opposition Mark Latham also conducted an online poll, where he invited the voters of Werriwa (Mr Latham’s electorate) to vote online on issues Mr Latham posted on his web site (Bishop, Kane, Patapan, 2002: 63). This was a short-lived experiment, as the voters in Mr Latham’s electorate voted against Mr Latham’s party’s position on that issue (Bishop et al, 2002: 59). The web site was shut down only a few posts after the first incident (Bishop et al, 2002: 60). However, while this particular experiment was not a success, it shows representatives are more willing to embrace a more representative democracy within the system, via the interactive Internet (Bishop et al, 2002: 61).
Internationally, sites such as the Minnesota E-Democracy Project encourage participation in the political process by creating online communities of people interested in finding information about their political candidates (Sampford, 2001: 1). This web site is an example of the online community, and has hosted the world’s first online political debate for the race for Governor (Sampford, 2001: 2). Users of this site were able to read the posts of the candidates, and read other material as it was posted by the candidates (Sampford, 2001: 2). This non-partisan web site allowed for free debate and discussion on political issues over a long period, and gave citizens an opportunity to read these comments at their leisure (Sampford, 2001: 1).
Citizens are also more willing to give their financial support to and read a candidate's web site, meaning more information about the candidate will be given to potential voters and candidates will be able to access a wider group for campaign contributions. (Franke-Ruta, 2003: A7).
Ben Fraser 19:06, 28 Oct 2004 (EST)
Bishop, Kane, Patapan (2002) 'E-Democracy: Challenges to Democratic Theory ' Australian Parliamentary Review, vol 17(2) pp 55-68
Bellamy C., and Taylor, JA (1998) Governing in the Information Age Great Britain: Biddles Ltd ISBN 0335194508
Coleman, S (2004) 'Connecting Parliament to the Public Via the Internet: Two case studies of online consultations' Information Communication & Society, vol 7 no 1, pp 3-22. ISSN 1468-4462.
Dixon, N (2001) E-Voting: Elections via the Internet? [Online] Available at: http://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/Parlib/Publications_pdfs/books/rbr0101nd.pdf. [Accessed 11 August 2004]
Finnegan, R, Salaman, G, Thompson, K (ed) Information Technology: Social Issues Great Britain: Hodder and Stoughton ISBN 0340416696
Franke-Ruta, G., (2003) ‘Virtual Politics: How the Internet is Transforming Democracy’, The American Prospect [online], vol 14, no 9, pp A6-A8. Available: Informit database. [Accessed 7 August 2004] Help America Vote Act 2002 (US)
Kane, J., and Patapan, H., (2004) ‘Challenge and Promise of E-democracy’ Griffith Review [Online], no 3 Autumn 2004 pp 201-7. Available: Informit database. [Accessed 7 August 2004]
Mercurio, B (2003) ‘Overhauling Australian Democracy: The Benefits and Burdens of Internet Voting’ University of Tasmania Law Review, vol 21(2) pp23-65 [Online]. Available through the Informit database. [Accessed 7 August 2004]
Rubin, A (2000) Security Considerations for Remote Electronic Voting over the Internet [Online] Available: http://www.avirubin.com/e-voting.security.html [Accessed 11 August 2004]
Sampford, K (2001) E-Democracy and Election Campaigns: Recent Case Studies From USA and Developments In Australia [Online] Available: http://www.parliament.qld.gov.au/Parlib/Publications_pdfs/books/rbr0201ks.pdf. [Accessed 11 August 2004]
Stockwell, S,. (2001) ‘Hacking Democracy: the work of the Global Citizen’ Southern Review [Online], vol 34 no 3 pp 87-103. Available: Informit database [Accessed 7 August 2004]
Queensland Government (2001) E-democracy Policy Framework [Online]. Available: http://www.communities.qld.gov.au/community/publications/documents/pdf/edemocracypolicyframework.pdf [Accessed 11 August 2004]
For more information on these sources, see the Annotated Bibliography
Ben Fraser 10:28, 29 Oct 2004 (EST)
Ben Fraser 13:06, 26 Oct 2004 (EST)
Ben Fraser 10:09, 29 Oct 2004 (EST)
