6 have written.  Governments have attempted to deal with this in many ways, and the catchcry is always ‘accessibility’ in both of the meanings with which I began: “make justice easier to access, simpler to comprehend, quicker to deliver, and more certain”; but also, “involve us in the process by which this reform is achieved”.  They want to be  certain  that  we  understand  exactly  what  their  frustrations  with  current  legal processes  are,  and  they  also  fear  that,  sitting  down  to  consider  how  to  reduce  nine points of the law to five, we will, like the lawyers in Jarndyce v. Jarndyce, come up with fifteen.  We must accept, I believe, this challenge: to involve citizens both in the reconsideration  of  areas  of  concern  in  law,  and  in  the  process  by  which  we  work towards suggested reforms. We must begin, I suggest, by acknowledging that few law reform bodies have been at the forefront of the rush to use the technological revolution of the last decade as a tool for engagement, consultation, feedback, and review.  It is instructive to compare our reliance  on  traditional  methods  of  considering  changes  to  the  law  –  reference, research, discussion paper, and orthodox forms of ‘public consultation’ leading to a report   to   the   Attorney-General   –   with   the   innovations   of   the   other   arms   of government, particularly the very parliaments which we rely on to give ultimate effect to our proposals.  In Britain, an ‘eDemocracy’ programme has been inspired by the work  of  Professor  Stephen  Coleman  of  the  Oxford  Internet  Institute  at  Oxford University.  A website about its work⁶ highlights the following statement: “Public cynicism about the House of Commons is a serious problem and we need more effective institutions in a world where power has passed increasingly to those we do not elect and cannot remove.  If democracy is to survive and develop we shall have to start again at the   grass   roots   and   make   those   in   power   listen,   for   political management is not the same as political representation.” These ideas have led to the setting up of interactive community consultation websites such as www.communitypeople.net.    In  Australia,  initiatives  have  been  undertaken  by  parliaments  to  increase  civic engagement and social capital reflecting the view expressed by Walter Bagehot in the                                                 6   www.hansardsociety.org.uk\node\biew\130 visited 31/3/2004.