One of the dangers of all forms of democracy is that it ignores evidence. Or that only the evidence that supports a preconceived policy is used. Interactive Democracy has a number of ways of dealing with this problem:-
- It provides an open, free and fair forum for everyone, including all the scientists in the country.
- It allows leaders to emerge from all fields, not just from the political class.
- The debate provides the opportunity to change people's minds, raise questions, challenge and clarify.
- The system gives the opportunity for all to rank the type of evidence presented, from heresay to empirical and everything in between.
- Contributions to the debate can be filtered by the type of evidence and by demographics, including the qualifications of the contributor. This provides both citizens and politicians the ability to filter the debate as they see fit, for example by those holding PhDs.
- Politicians can both contribute to the debate in its early stages, in order to shape opinion, and analyse the debate in order to help formulate referendum options, request further study or instigate limited trials and experiments.
- New laws and policies should have clearly defined measurable objectives, reviewed by the Office for National Statistics. Progress against the objective would be published on-line as part of the ID site, which would highlight failures of policy for reassessment.
- This should all be done under the umbrella law against lies in public life.