Our political process would work better, I believe, if there were more "transparency" in government. I am on the side of the Wikileakers, in other words. The debate and discussion that leads to the collective decisions that create our human world will almost always be better informed, and therefore substantively better, if more, not less, information is available for the debate.
The "availability" of good information, of course, doesn't guarantee that it will be used, or that good information will prevail, in the realm of political discourse. Have you, for instance, ever heard of Fox News, which claims to employ a "fair and balanced" approach to political debate?
My conclusion about the "transparency" discussion is that trying to focus lots of energy on providing transparency as a major objective of our politics is likely to be a diversion. We already have plenty of information upon which we can build our case for change and action (from whichever side we argue, on whatever question).
And as for truth, the "truth will out." That is my real belief:
From Shakespeare's The Merchant of Venice, 1596:
In the longer run, it seems to me, transparency will take care of itself.
LAUNCELOT: Nay, indeed, if you had your eyes, you might fail of the knowing me: it is a wise father that knows his own child. Well, old man, I will tell you news of your son: give me your blessing: truth will come to light; murder cannot be hid long; a man's son may, but at the length truth will out.