Why did we stop caring about local elections?

The Tories, meanwhile, had set themselves the ludicrous target of gaining 30 seats, so were able to depict their 500-plus gains as a triumph.

The other parties were little better. It never seems to occur to politicians that an honest assessment might increase their credibility.

The truth is that the local elections in England, together with the polls for the Scottish parliament and Welsh assembly, were a depressing reminder of the parlous state of our democracy and, in particular, the extent to which many voters regard councils as irrelevant.

In England, no more than one in three voters went to the polls. In Wales, turnout was down about 10% on 1999 – fewer than four in 10 bothered to take part. In Scotland, it was down eight points on last time.

The traditional view is that increased apathy can be traced to the loss of local authority influence – both this government and its Tory predecessor have centralised power and decision-making in Whitehall. They have also created other local institutions that muddy the waters of accountability.

For good or ill, housing associations have diminished the role of English councils in one of their most visible functions. Now their last two major areas of responsibility – education and social services – are under threat.

The elections were a depressing reminder of the parlous state of our democracy and, in particular, the extent to which many voters regard councils as irrelevant

With a national curriculum, tests every five seconds and a clear expectation that central government money will be passed to headteachers without interference, councils' capacity to shape education has already been reduced. The idea of direct funding to schools will almost certainly be seriously considered after the row over this year's allocation.

Social services faces the prospect that care of the elderly will be passed to the health service with the emergence of care trusts. And what if child protection is hived off as some form of separate agency? This is not beyond the bounds of possibility when the government finally produces its white paper on children's services. Meanwhile, much work with deprived families now comes under Sure Start, a central government initiative and youth work is being taken over by "Connexions" , again run from central government, while youth offenders are dealt with by teams operating under the auspices of the nationally run Youth Justice Board.

This is not to suggest that these changes are bad or that local accountability has disappeared. The council chief executive, for example, has overall responsibility for youth-offending teams – but it reflects a new dispensation in which local government often seems like a outpost of Whitehall.

Although this might explain some of that voter reluctance, it cannot be the whole story – the poor turnouts in Wales and Scotland, where politicians have control of education and health, suggest there is more to it.

Some commentators argue that low turnouts reflect a shift from "old-fashioned politics" (they mean elected representatives) towards direct action. They point with glee to the millions who took to the streets to oppose war in Iraq, and with rather less glee to the vast number who responded to the call of the Countryside Alliance. But marches are nothing new in the UK and the anti-war movement's failure to sustain its support suggests that this form of participation has its limits. It is a vital valve in our democratic structure, but it is no substitute for that.

So as we seek to bring democracy to Iraq, perhaps we need to pause and consider the state of our body politic. Citizenship classes in schools may help, postal voting would boost participation and some new ways are being tried to engage local communities, but is something more fundamental not required to reinvigorate these institutions?