It is difficult to understand what the writer is aiming at. Transparency in government is irreplaceable as it allows the voting public to compare what a government says it will do and what a government actually does. That is good for an honest government (if one can be found in this world) and bad for a dishonest government.

The writer says when a conflict arises between the citizens and government a group of concerned citizens will automatically turn to their blogs and comments as they broadcast their position through the Internet. He says that these "usual suspects" could have an alternative agenda for the reasons that they write on one topic or another. I would agree that there are lobby groups on a wide range of subjects.

He continues If there is a grass roots popular support of how the citizen would prefer their tax dollars to be spent then these individuals should join and exchange views, formulating policy, and by joining gain sufficient political power to influence the government in what the author refers to as deliberative democracy.

It abounds with questions. Who will control these grass root movements? Who will formulate them into cohesive groups? How will they function? Who will they be answerable to? Unelected, unaccountable grass roots movements that impose their will on elected government is an elitist and unconscionable proposition at best.

I would feel more comfortable with a transparent, elected and accountable council (as corrupt as some can be) than someone or group that is totally unaccountable lurking in the shadows lobbying councils for unknown reasons, given that altruism in politics, at any level, is not their strong suit