If their MP doesn’t even have a website, what message does that send about their willingness to engage with their electorate?

In a New Statesman editorial, Jo Swinson is Liberal Democrat MP for East Dunbartonshire in the UK, calls on her colleagues in politics to take a more active role in participatory new media:

An excerpt:

“MySociety, the team behind sites such as They Work For You and Fix My Street have been campaigning for months for parliament to produce information about legislation electronically with tags so that the data can be easily used by websites to help the public understand what is happening to each Bill. Despite the support of more than 100 MPs for this campaign, the Houses of Parliament authorities have still not agreed to make these changes.

Astonishingly, there is a ban on placing clips of questions or debates in Parliament on YouTube and other video sharing sites. I’ve been fighting this for a year now, and while the copyright issue looks like it could be resolved fairly easily, the real barrier is reluctance from MPs who are worried about the “reputation of Parliament” if clips were manipulated or placed alongside inappropriate content.

There seems to be a total lack of understanding that in the internet age it is impossible to control images of Parliament, and that the reputation of parliament is damaged if it is regarded as an out of touch institution.

New technologies create wonderful potential to engage people in politics. Rather than watching BBC Parliament for hours in the hope something of interest pops up, people could search for clips of questions on topics of interest. Pressure groups could circulate links to relevant clips to their members. The most interesting and popular clips could be promoted virally, through people sharing them with family, friends and colleagues.”