Virtual Deliberation in Legislative Bodies: Bridging Gaps between Institutions, Representatives, and Public Engagement
Written on May, 2020
Introduction
The technological shift has been at the forefront of changes in various sectors, and parliaments are not immune to this transformation. This essay delves into the intricate dynamics governing virtual parliaments, focussing on three key aspects: the evolution of parliamentary models, the institutional gaps between parliament and parliamentarians, and the challenges and opportunities in public engagement.
The Evolution of Parliamentary Models
In the past, legislative bodies operated on what can be referred to as a "Gentleman's Club" model, characterised by limited public interaction and an elite circle of decision-makers. The 20th century saw a shift towards a more representative model, where elected officials acted on behalf of their constituents. However, the advent of the internet and social media has led to pressures for a more participative democracy. Citizens, now more informed and connected, demand a say in policies beyond periodic elections. Despite the technological possibilities, many legislative bodies continue to operate under a representative paradigm, resulting in a dissonance between public expectations and institutional realities.
The Institutional Gap
The disjunction between parliamentary institutions and individual parliamentarians is another challenge. On the one hand, institutions are evolving to incorporate sophisticated digital systems and platforms designed to facilitate citizen involvement. Yet, parliamentarians often lag in their ability to utilise these tools, either due to a lack of awareness or because of their embedded political practices. This gap not only hinders effective governance but also exacerbates the disconnect between legislative bodies and the public they serve.
Public Engagement: Challenges and Opportunities
Public participation is not merely a matter of enabling comment sections on parliamentary websites. It involves a complex interplay of making information available, accessible, and understandable to the public, and subsequently integrating this public input into legislative processes. While some parliaments have been proactive in soliciting public opinions, the actual utilisation of this feedback in shaping policies or legislation is often minimal. Moreover, the absence of a feedback loop diminishes public trust and interest in these participatory channels, as they perceive their input as inconsequential.
Conclusion
Virtual parliaments are at a critical juncture, balancing between traditional practices and the demands of a digitally connected electorate. The challenges are manifold: evolving from a representative to a more participative model, bridging the institutional gaps that inhibit effective governance, and fostering genuine public engagement. However, these challenges also offer opportunities for transformation. Legislative bodies must adapt to these changing dynamics to ensure they remain relevant, effective, and truly representative in the digital age.