The possible use of the internet by the perpetrators of the 11 September attacks provoked a great deal of debate. Had the internet been used as a means of communication between those who committed this atrocity? Could there have been some crucial information hidden in the depths of some pornography sites?

At a recent Europaeum conference, "Democracy and the Internet: new rules for new times", I talked to Tim Berners-Lee, the father of the World Wide Web, who gave some credence to this discussion. It was only when confronted by some journalists afterwards that Tim was asked: "But surely you are the Frankenstein who created this monster that allows so much knowledge in the world that people could commit such an act under the radar of the public services and the FBI?" He smiled, and replied: "If it wasn't the internet, it would have been letters or some other form of correspondence."

Metaphorically speaking, we can now, as individuals, almost wrap our arms around the world we live in. If we want quickly to set up a lingerie company or find out how to make a cake, we can do it via the internet. It is that easy, and we begin to take it for granted. The internet is here to stay, but what form it takes, how we use it, and how citizens interact with the public sector and government through it, are issues that still require some debate. Immediately after the war, my father, like most of his generation, really enjoyed the paternalistic feel of government and its ability to look after his needs as a citizen, both economically and in terms of security. Yet when we wind the clock forward to today, we see that the X and Y generations have become incredibly demanding, sophisticated and discerning as consumers.They now have more money and create more competition among the existing channels than our parents would have understood; and more demands are made of them about their own times and how they engage with them. By using the internet, they can go into a car showroom knowing more about a car than the salesperson, and they may know more than a politician about their pet subject.

The Europaeum conference was about collaborative representation rather than representational democracy. We have always been very happy that a few people should be chosen to make choices on behalf of the many. But in events such as the fuel protests in Britain and the demonstrations against the World Trade Organisation in Genoa, we saw the recognition by cyber-communities that they have a real interest in coming together to make their voice heard. I do not believe that we should have a total direct say in how the country is run, but I do believe that the demanding consumer is now combining with the previously respectful citizen. The government, working with industry initiatives such as Stepchange, really needs to fast-track this – especially given that Tony Blair’s mandate for the second term was all about delivery, delivery, delivery. When I talk to anyone involved in e-enablement for the citizen, they usually say that another department needs to make that decision first. It is becoming more and more urgent to put pressure on these groups and departments to start making those decisions and making progress.

As a citizen, I would like to be able to interact with a local council that does not have 500 uncorrelated databases that know me as 500 different people. We have to work out all that business of government before we can use e-enablement to interact with the citizen.

Stuart Hill is the director of BT Stepchange, which has recently been working with the government on the UK online portal, which will enable citizens to use a whole range of government services via a single web-based access point. For more information, visit www.egovernment.bt.com