On Tuesday 24th June 2025, Politics in Pubs Manchester met to discuss whether ArtificiaI Intelligence can save democracy.  Our guest speaker Steve Endacott, disillusioned by the state of political debate, has not only asked the question but has also come up with a fascinating experiment to explore the potential, pitfalls and dangers of a technology which is at the cusp of enabling huge societal change.

Introduction

Steve began by describing his journey into politics.  After having successful corporate and entrepreneurial careers with companies like MyTravel PLC and Holiday Taxis Group, Steve made the decision to retire and try a different challenge.  Concerned about the impact of climate change, and dismayed by the low quality of political debate, Steve began to wonder what contribution he could make to improve society for the better. He decided to enter the world of politics.

Having grown up with parents who were staunch Labour voters, and grandparents who were resolutely Conservative, Steve describes his own position as politically centrist.  He decided to join the Conservative Party but soon discovered that its ‘jobs for the boys’ ethos meant that its MP slots were allocated by nepotism rather by merit.

Governed by a political elite

The last five prime ministers were educated at Oxford or Cambridge universities and the vast majority of MPs are educated at public schools.  Steve began to realise that we are governed by a political elite, and that British democracy is not in a good state from the voters’ point of view.

Steve presented statistics showing that only 9% of Britons trust politicians and only 63% of those eligible vote in general elections.  A mere fortnight after an election, 75% of voters cannot recall the name of the MP they voted for, such is the detachment between them.  With up to five years between general elections, Steve began to appreciate the clear disconnect between the political elite and voters, and a reluctance of politicians to engage.  He decided to apply himself to addressing the problem of how to enable more frequent interaction between voters and their political representatives…. and turned to the world of AI.

How would AI improve democracy?

Steve explained that AI makes it possible to open up a new channel of communication between constituents and their MPs which can be actioned at the press of a button using a smart phone.  The software enables voters to contact an AI version of their MP on a 24/7 basis 365 days of the year.  They can use it to ask questions of the AI-MP and give opinions on policies they would like the real MP to adopt.  At first, responses from the AI-MP are generated using training data but over time this data is developed and refined using internet research and analysis of the questions and opinions from voters.

In order to enrich the AI’s training data, constituents who are willing to share their opinions can apply to act as Creators and their views are used to shape policies.  Others can apply act as Validators who vote on a scale of 1:10 on whether a policy should be adopted: the highest-scoring policies to be adopted if they pass the minimum 50% threshold.

AI is capable of handling many transactions simultaneously – like on-line call centre agents  – and can also summarise and research what has been discussed for analysis and used to shape policy.  However, Steve was keen to make it clear that the AI itself does not formulate policy – it merely does the legwork to enable the MP’s team of human beings to prioritise and create policies which democratically represent the views of a majority of constituents. AI can also be used to conduct referenda on specific issues.

Steve summarised the democratic value of this process as ‘creating policies for the people, by the people’, making it necessary for MPs to subjugate their own opinions and act for the majority.

Meet AI-Steve

Disillusioned from his experience with the Conservative Party, and intrigued by the possibilities of democratising the relationship between voters and their MPs using AI, Steve founded the SmarterUK Party and commissioned production of the first AI-MP candidate – known as AI-Steve (https://ai-steve.co.uk) .  The party was not registered in time for last year’s snap election so AI-Steve stood as an independent candidate for Brighton and Hove.  In the short campaigning window leading up to the election, AI-Steve made it possible to talk to all Brighton’s 45,000 constituents simultaneously, answering questions on policy views while researching how new policy should be developed.

Media interest

While AI-Steve did not win the seat, it did attract 110 million views on international TV channels, including a live interview with CNN.  Unfortunately the local press in Sussex chose to focus its reporting upon the mainstream party candidates and AI-Steve received very little coverage.  A survey after the election revealed that only 8% of Brighton and Hove constituents had heard of AI-Steve.

Will AI-Steve join a political tribe?

The lack of coverage by local press demonstrated the need for AI -Steve to compete in elections as part of an established political tribe rather than as an independent in order to have a platform.  But which one?  Steve himself identifies most closely with the Green Party.  However, he can see key issues which are not being addressed by any of the main parties, such as the massive negative impact of AI upon employment levels in the next decade.  While AI-Steve may need to join a political tribe, Steve believes that the software should not be restricted to that tribe but made available to all parties on a local, regional and national basis, and to those overseas for the purpose of improving the democratic process for all.

Discussion

The technology would benefit from being de-centralised (like Bitcoin) to prevent it from being mis-applied.  AI hallucination is problematic.  This is why humans are still required to formulate policy for AI-Steve.  AI code and hardware eventually disintegrate – but so do humans!

Politicians get elected on a manifesto but then they don’t deliver.  They massage their policies to get elected, like Cambridge Analytical harvested data in America.  The difference with AI-Steve is that humans make the final decisions on policy, not the AI.  AI could also help engage the public with referenda on specific topics and policies.  We currently don’t have a voice.

AI-Steve already speaks 42 different languages.  The AI genie is already out of the bottle – so should the UK be at the front or the back of the AI industry?  Offering tax breaks to companies willing to base themselves in the UK would ensure that we lead the industry and benefit from it.  We need more business people in government to see the opportunities and work out how to incentivise the business community.  Unregulated AI is potentially a disaster with commercial organisations controlling it and making a lot of money.

The UK needs a DOGE.  The whole of the British Empire was run with 40,000 civil servants.  We now have 512,000.  What are they all doing?

AI-Steve is really impressive – its speed, charm and capacity to explain the implications of certain policies and issues.  It would be an excellent tool for conducting referenda.  The UK should be at the forefront of developing this capability.

AI will almost certainly have an impact on employment by replacing jobs like lawyers, accountants and radiographers.  AI is the new industrial revolution.  The government needs to plan for the future to prevent mass unemployment and the potential for social unrest.  This should include apprenticeships in jobs that AI can’t do, like being a plumber or a farrier.  Unfortunately politicians don’t think long-term.

This kind of technology is inevitable and we should embrace it.  However, if it is to improve democracy, it needs to be separated from the tired conventional wisdom and set narratives on topics like Trump and the climate ’emergency’.  What would the human behind AI-Steve do if voters didn’t have similar views to his own?  The human would need to change his mind if he couldn’t convince voters his own beliefs and priorities (e.g. ceasing the over-taxing of high street businesses and under-taxing large corporations) were the best.  Either that or resign.

The UK is not ready for this industrial revolution.  We lack the facilities and our Net Zero strategies inflate our energy costs and aim to de-industrialise.  We should be making more use of the Rolls Royce mini reactors to produce nuclear energy and issuing more grants for AI development to nurture home-grown talent and innovation.  Thousands of small businesses could benefit from the application of AI.

30-40% of voters turn-out in a local election.  In Brazil, elections are electronic and compulsory.  Does AI-Steve have an opinion about the level of participation required to make a UK election legitimate?  It would definitely make voting easier, like on-line banking has for customers.

The AI-Steve experiment in Brighton and Hove is really interesting – democracy should be lively and widespread and if AI can help to engage voters that’s good.  But is there a danger of voters feeling like they are being fed a stream of information and could it put them off?  Education union reps were workplace based and had to be well-regarded, trusted and accountable in order to remain in post and succeed at each level (local, regional, national).  Thatcher changed the law on unions which led to disengagement.  Given the ‘jobs for the boys’ culture in politics – AI could help local people to scrutinise their prospective representatives instead of letting the political parties parachute in their preferred candidates.

Security of a AI voting system is a concern – many organisations are hacked, even banks.  Crypto tech is more secure.

Would AI just lead to computer-generated spin doctors?  Perhaps it would be better to involve local people in the delivery of local services, serving a fixed term unpaid, like a jury system.

Like humans, there is a risk that AI has its own biases.  Trust in the democratic process is already lacking – even people who voted to Remain in 2016 could not fail to notice Westminster’s on-going efforts to subvert the EU referendum result –  and this is one of the reasons why voters are disengaging.  If it is to help save democracy, AI needs avoid the GIGO principle by permitting all facts and points of view, analysing data impartially, and obliging politicians to remain accountable to their voters.

AI is a good tool for engaging people but face-to-face contact is better.  People crave the human touch which is why Farage with his willingness to chat to voters over a pint makes him so popular.  AI can never replace that and should be regarded as a tool for gathering and analysing data about what voters want from their political representatives.  While the nature of AI makes it much more efficient than door-knocking and leafletting, AI can’t compete with chatting face-to-face about politics in a pub.  However, it does seem to have the potential to improve democracy by enabling easier and speedier interaction between voters and politicians, and analysing local opinions and priorities.  Time will tell whether AI can also make MPs and councillors more accountable to their voters…..

Politics in Pubs Manchester would like to thank Steve Endacott for providing a captivating and eye-opening insight into the application of AI to our democratic process.  We would also like to thank our wonderful hosts at The Welcome Inn.  Cheers all!  

Upcoming events

All our future events are advertised here: Upcoming Events.