---

e-Government

: I understand the hon. Gentleman's point, but he gives another reason why we should hope that there will be no change of Government in future elections. There is a remote possibility of a change of Government to the Conservatives. However, there is also a general acceptance that even in their darkest and most authoritarian days, they would not have abused these systems had they been in place. The likelihood of a Liberal Democrat Government is so far-fetched that I do not believe any of us have bothered to investigate the tendency or inclination of a Liberal Administration to such abuse, but I would give them the benefit of the doubt. Whether conservative with a large ““C”” or a small ““c””, no Liberal Administration would get involved in the sort of activity that the hon. Gentleman claims to fear could be carried out by this or any future Government. Consider the political and personal cultures of this country, the investigative journalism capacity and the checks and balances. First, Parliament would have to agree to any changes to the system, and the people of this country are not set, nor will they ever be, to elect a group of people to this House who in a majority would vote for an alternative-facing means of managing the national register. That may not be the case in other countries. For example, there is discussion in the press about what is happening in China, but it has a different political culture and history, and a different approach to many of the IT opportunities. Indeed, picking up on the comment of the right hon. Member for North-East Hampshire about whether IT is a threat or an opportunity, it seems that some Governments elsewhere in the world consider it a threat to their control rather than an opportunity for their citizens. My hon. Friend the Member for Ellesmere Port and Neston began by saying that he served under your chairmanship, Mr. Hancock, in 1970. He did not offer details of the capacity in which he or you were serving, but at that time you certainly could not have envisaged that three decades later you would be sitting in the House of Commons—perhaps you could, I have no idea. However, I do not expect that either of you envisaged having a discussion in the House of Commons 30 years later about e-Government, of all things. There were a few computers in the country at that time, and the Government had to publish a list of all of theirs. In those early days, each computer had 100 times less power and capacity than today's average mobile phone, and each computer took up a large room to fulfil very limited functions. My hon. Friend pressed for the need for citizen-focused IT structures and systems, and for breaking down organisational barriers. He rightly talked about the need for pride in the services that already work. Vast swathes of our daily life are enabled by IT in the private sector—and, of course, in the public sector. He demanded that we should not seek to reinvent the wheel. That will be made clear in the IT strategy that will be published. We have no intention of reinventing the wheel—there will be no big-bang, day-one introductions of massive IT projects. That lesson has been learned from experiences over the years. My hon. Friend also mentioned the need to involve others in service design—in website design as well as design of the service itself—and the importance of learning from international experience. He spoke about the Australian system; the Australian Minister responsible for it is meeting the e-government unit here in the UK next month. I should also mention that, arising from my meeting in my hon. Friend's constituency, I received a letter from Sandy Watts of the local citizens advice bureau. He made some specific recommendations about Government IT and how it relates to the citizens advice bureaux, and he made a series of suggestions and raised some reasonable concerns, which I am taking up.