It seems reasonable to suggest that. Not without careful consideration and serious safeguards. It also seems reasonable to suggest that governments should interact with their constituents in an open, transparent manner, in both the media they use and the technologies used to convey their policies, laws, and debates.
Though reasonable, few governments actually do this. Well, Australia just took a big step toward ensuring that not only are its Parliamentary debates and proceedings free to the public in terms of cost, they are also free to the public in terms of freedom.
Larry Lessig argues that "code is law," meaning that the very software we use to construct the Internet, intranets, etc. has a powerful effect on what is actually possible through these communication media. A closed architecture can have a profoundly deleterious effect on freedom, both in the political sense and in the practical sense. On Microsoft's software I can do what Microsoft allows. On open software...? I determine my destiny.
It is therefore important that Australia opted for open-source software in capturing the mind and history of its parliament. This is what sovereign nations do. Or, at least, it's what they should do.