The future of politics is unpredictable, but it’s a safe bet that by the time the next recess comes along there will be more politicians ‘blogging’ than ever.

After all, who wouldn’t want to know that their MP had purchased a new mobile phone, that their child ate its breakfast with a blue spoon, that their councillor had forgotten to pay their web hosting bill or had managed to have their suit dry cleaned?* Though I must admit I find the last point reassuring.

Some go into amazing detail of which dull high street they trudged down yesterday and which interest group they have spoken to. This stuff is exactly what our representatives should be doing, but a great read it does not make. It’s almost as if the reader is being invited to share the politician’s pain!

Imagine Gordon Brown’s blog for Monday: “Got up, ate frugal breakfast of cold cardboard, brushed teeth with scouring powder, put on best hair shirt and dubious tie then set off for Brighton to upset Union leaders. Home in time to read bedtime story. Another great day for my image.”

What I find remarkable about so many of our politician’s blogs is not that they are dull, but that so many fail to make any political points whatsoever. How ‘what my MP ate for breakfast’ (so long as it isn’t the flesh of babies) is supposed to make me more or less likely to vote their way beats me.

Unfortunately some ‘political’ blogs consist of nothing but standard copy issued by the headquarters of political parties or inane diatribes against opponents. The problem for the blogging politico is that anything they say can and will be used in evidence against them. The political parties spend much of their time discouraging their members from dangerous stuff like ‘having an opinion’, so a lot of the more entertaining political blogs are anonymous. Some of the titles are better than the content – I particularly like ‘Never Trust a Hippy’, ‘Wife in the North’ and ‘Drink Soaked Trots’.

But while the ‘nom de plume’ in print journalism is an honourable tradition subject to laws of defamation, hiding behind anonymity in politics is inherently spineless. If an opinion is worth having, or something is worth saying, then it is worth standing by. But of course it is much easier to spread lies, libels and half-truths by publishing anonymously on the web. In fact as it is almost impossible to sue anyone, even those who put their name to their websites (hosted beyond UK law) can say pretty much what they like and get away with it.

Kun Nutt, in the Iain Banks novel ‘Dead Air’ sums it up perfectly, “They can post any sort of hate filled drivel they want with no comeback because on-line they can hide. It’s the perfect medium for bullies, liars and cowards.”

In principle, I’ve always been in favour of new fangled stuff like blogs and Facebook. I had a website when I was a councillor, though I’m the first to admit that I couldn’t find the time to keep it up to date. There was something more urgent to do. Now it is even worse – by the time the modern representative has written the blog, update the website, sent the email newsletter, logged in to Facebook, recorded their podcast for MySpace and posted their video on YouTube there is little time left to do any actual work.

All this stuff is really still in its infancy and it will certainly become more important. Used well, the web could bring public debate into forums that it has traditionally failed to reach. After all, you can find out anything on the Web – except the date of the next election!

John Howarth

PS This column will be giving awards to Reading’s the best and worst of Reading’s political blog sites later this year.

* All these are actual stories taken from the real blogs of Members of Parliament.

JH adds: OK, so we went off the idea – for the moment, and if you can’t beat ‘em.