New Labour chief strategy advisor blames bloggers for the Government's unpopularity

Tony Blair's outgoing chief strategy adviser fears the internet could be fuelling a "crisis" in the relationship between politicians and voters.

What right has he got to speak for all politicians, from all parties ?

It is the Labour Party which is in crisis, as the May 2007 local elections will undoubtedly show.

Matthew Taylor - who stressed he was speaking as a "citizen" not a government spokesman - said the web could be "fantastic" for democracy.

But it was too often used to encourage the "shrill discourse of demands" that dominated modern politics.

What about the Government's manipulation of the mainstream media, with briefings for the weekend newspapers before informing Parliament of important policy changes, of selective leaks to favoured journalists etc ?

He was speaking on the day Mr Blair carried out an online interview.

Mr Taylor said Mr Blair's online grilling from voters - and other initiatives such as environment secretary David Miliband's blog and Downing Street's new online petition service - showed the government was making good progress in using the internet to become more open and accountable.

What weasel words !

All "Number 10 Downing Street webchats" are even more controlled than Lobby press conferences - there are no "surprise" questions, even though a few people type them in "live".

David Miliband's taxpayer funded and civil servant run blog, is notorious for its utter lack of any sort of dialogue with the readership, comments aand feedback are allowed, but are utterly ignored.

The "new online petition service" was not developed by the Government, it was done by the mySociety crew, who have done more to bring democratic scrutiny to Parliament than the army of civil servants and Labour party apparatchiki put together., with websites like TheyWorkForYou.com etc.

But he said more needed to be done by the web community in general to encourage people to use the internet to "solve problems" rather than simply abuse politicians or make "incommensurate" demands on them.

'Teenagers'

Speaking at an e-democracy conference in central London, he said modern politics was all about "quality of life" and that voters had a "very complex set of needs".

New Labour politics seems to all about disparately clinging on to power through media spin, huge amounts of complicated legislation and a naive belief in unproven technology, which is spun into Must Be Seen To Be Doing Something "policies" dreamt up by political commissars like Matthew Taylor, without reference to the real world.

The end of deference, the rapid pace of social change and growing diversity were all good things, he argued, but they also meant governments found it increasingly difficult to govern.

Increasingly difficult compared with when, exactly ?

There are plenty of people willing to make a better job of it than the current NuLabour clique.

"We have a citizenry which can be caricatured as being increasingly unwilling to be governed but not yet capable of self-government," Mr Taylor told the audience.

How patronising ! The Party knows best does it ? This is argument of one party state dictatorships all over the world.

New Labour's arrogance is so contemptible, it is generating actual hatred of them.

Like "teenagers", people were demanding, but "conflicted" about what they actually wanted, he argued.

They wanted "sustainability", for example, but not higher fuel prices, affordable homes for their children but not new housing developments in their town or village.

Most of the price of fuel is tax - blame Gordon Brown !

The strategic planning of new housing developments has been in the incompetent hands of John Prescott.

'Impoverished relationship'

But rather than work out these dilemmas in partnership with their elected leaders, they were encouraged to regard all politicians as corrupt or "mendacious" by the media, which he described as "a conspiracy to maintain the population in a perpetual state of self-righteous rage".

Whether media was left wing or right wing, the message was always that "leaders are out there to shaft you".

There are numerous examples of this Labour government's mendacity and incompetence - why try to shoot the messenger ?

Are we meant to have magically forgotten the likes of Peter Mandelson and David Blunkett ?

We feel genuine rage because of the Labour party's genuinely incompetent and downright evil policies, which have driven us into a bureaucratic surveillance nanny state, without any compensation, in terms of freedom from crime and terrorism.

He went on: "At a time at which we need a richer relationship between politicians and citizens than we have ever had, to confront the shared challenges we face, arguably we have a more impoverished relationship between politicians and citizens than we have ever had.

"It seems to me this is something which is worth calling a crisis."

Again, with typical NuLabour Orwellian newspeak, he is falesly claiming to represent all politicians, rather than just the ruling NuLabour clique.

Blogs

The internet, he told the conference, was part of that "crisis".

"The internet has immense potential but we face a real problem if the main way in which that potential expresses itself is through allowing citizens to participate in a shrill discourse of demands.

What about the vicious circle of government policies and priorities, which depend on the the amount of media coverage and "column inches" in the very publications and broadcast media, which have been spoon fed press release and leaks and exclusive interviews e.g. the "climate of fear" media leaks and repressive anti-terrorism legislationand policies ?

That is the real "shrill discourse of demands" in modern politics.

"If you look at the way in which citizens are using technology and the way that is growing up, there are worrying signs that that is the case.

"What is the big breakthrough, in terms of politics, on the web in the last few years? It's basically blogs which are, generally speaking, hostile and, generally speaking, basically see their job as every day exposing how venal, stupid, mendacious politicians are.

"The internet is being used as a tool of mobilisation, which is fantastic, but it only adds to the growing, incommensurate nature of the demands being made on government."

He challenged the online community to provide more opportunities for "people to try to understand the real trade-offs that politicians face and the real dilemmas that citizens face".

We have used the internet to stimulate debate on complicated issues, often involving technology and the law, but the Labour Government has simply ignored our and other expert advice, and carried on regardless.

'Anti-establishment'

"I want people to have more power, but I want them to have more power in the context of a more mature discourse about the responsibilities of government and the responsibilities of citizens," Mr Taylor told delegates.

Part of the problem, he added, was the "net-head" culture itself, which was rooted in libertarianism and "anti-establishment" attitudes.

It is rooted in freedom and democracy, words which are paid lip service to, in an Orwellian doublethink way, by the NuLabour control freaks like Mathew Taylor, and his bosses Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.

He told delegates: "You have to be part of changing that culture. It's important for people who understand technology, to move from that frame of mind, which is about attacking the establishment into one which is about problem-solving and social enterprise."

What right has a hand waving political "strategic advisor" like like Matthew Taylor got, to lecture practical people who actually understand how technology works, and its limitations ?

The main problem to be solved is that of how best to get rid of NuLabour, without replacing it with an almost identical NuTory government.

Technology should be used to encourage elected representatives to communicate better with voters, he told delegates.

We do not want one way propaganda, spam and media spin from the Government or elected representatives, as typified by NuLabour "listening" charades, we want a genuine two way dialogue.

Government also needed to "develop new forms of consultation and engagement that are deliberative in their form and trust citizens to get to the heart of the difficult trade-offs involved."

There is little or no evidence of this happening right now, is there ?

The so called "public consultation" which produced the dreadful Identity Cards Act 2006 is a typical New Labour fake "public consultation", where the eventual detailed policy bears no sign of having taken any notice of expert public opinion, even from people who are in favour of the policy in principle.

There have been two formal public consultations since June this year, on quite complicated and technical issues which, whiere the documentation has been published on the world wide web, one on a Draft Code of Practice to do with Communications Traffic Data e.g. itemised phone bill and internet logfiles etc. and the other to do with preventing Money Service Businesses e.g. foreign exchange bureaux and money transfer shops, being used by by terrorists and drug dealers.

All well and good, except that the Government has not bothered to wait for the 12 week consultations to finish, before enacting secondary legislation which affects important areas of what was supposedly for consultation and discussion.

This makes a mockery of "consultations" and destroys the public's trust in the Government.

And there should be more effort to make communities "work together to solve problems," said Mr Taylor.

More effort by whom ? Who will pay for this "effort" ?

Mr Taylor is Tony Blair's chief adviser on political strategy and the former head of the centre left think tank the Institute of Public Policy Research (IPPR).

He must therefore share the blame for the NuLabour nanny / surveillance state, which they seem intent on creating, no doubt with the best of intentions, as they see it.

He is leaving 10 Downing Street next week, after three years,

Good riddance !

to become the chief executive of the Royal Society for the Encouragement of Arts (RSA).

Presumably this venerable arts / environmentalist establishment charity is hoping to make use of his contacts within the NuLabour Government to lobby for money and influence.

Will the is "Influence" last any longer than the lame duck Prime Minister Tony Blair ?

Is it better for him to be neutered in this job, rather than in some dodgy political lobbying firm ?

Is Matthew Taylor really saying that UK political bloggers are having some influence o this media obsessed NuLabour Government, even if it is only to help focus the mainstream media on some aspects of the Government's incompetence and mendacity ?

Or is it just a convenient excuse to cover up his own policy advice disasters ?