Voting in the General Election

Status
Not open for further replies.
The logic of evoting good is not what I would dispute... it's our experience of systems like these that makes us dubious...
It would be cheaper and more efficient if we had a civil service who could be trusted to deliver a proper online voting system. Look at Eircode. I have zero confidence another attempt at evoting would be a success.
 
Jim if we learned anything from the e-voting fiasco it is that it is not as simple and straightforward as you imply. There is no good reason why we should be the among the leaders in adopting electronic voting. Let others lead the way and once it has been proven to be a suitable medium, then we can adopt it. We have wasted enough money on this already with e-voting to risk trying to be a trailblazer on it again. From a quick Google it appears that no country in the world has adopted it fully yet apart from Estonia (source Wikipedia). Australia have been cautiously introducing it since 2001 but have still not fully adopted it - why not if it is so easy? Others have discussed it at length but have not adopted it (mainly for security concerns it appears).
 
jim said:
I should change my vote to dublin.
I will be driving home to vote though and i dont mind that really

The only point/question i am making/asking is: why not have electronic voting?

I would suggest that its possibly cheaper to administer than the current manual system and probably more secure and reliable as there is no human manual intervention. It could be audited im sure in a number of ways to give assurance as to its reliability etc.

It would be a lot more convenient for everyone if they could just log in (perhaps with pps number or something) to vote rather than physically going somewhere.

So why is this not a in place?

Im not debating the aspect of immigrants/emmigrants etc voting. I just would like to hear peoples views as to why we cannot vote electronically? We bank and buy stuff and do all sorts of important transactions online. To me voting online seems obvious and simple and would open up the possibility for our people living abroad to vote (if that was deemed aplropriate) .

Why is this not a reality?

I dont accept the arguement that it would be costly to implement. Yes sure it would cost a bob or 2 to put in place but so what?
Click to expand...

Jim

It would be too wide open to fraud. To vote, you have to present yourself at a polling station (in almost all cases) with identification. All of that would go if it was done online. Voting passwords and pin numbers would be stolen too easily.

As for cost, it would cost a fortune. When it's the State footing the bill, the cost automatically increases. The electronic voting system cost €54m. The introduction of the Leap Card in Dublin cost €55m and took TWELVE years to put in place (the privately run LUAS had their own travel card system up and running in a couple of years and I imagine at a fraction of the cost).

Going on past history, you are looking at tens of millions of euro, lots of debate and lots of time. Lots of people would get rich off it before it failed, there'd be a shrug of the shoulders from the minister in charge and we'd all move on without anyone being held accountable.


Steven
www.bluewaterfp.ie
 
Hi Steven,

Appreciate your thoughts on it and I hear what you are saying! I just think its a cynical mind-set but you may be right in a lot of what you are saying.

1. Re fraud - surely the current manual system is open to fraud in terms of counting votes. They have safeguards in place but when something is automated it is a lot less subject to fraud. It could be audited also in a number of ways to give appropriate assurance. If we can bank etc online then I am sure a system could easily be designed in such a way as to prevent fraud. There may be some residual risk but this could be controlled to some extent through auditing. In most organisations processes are moving from manual to automated for lots of good reasons. So to should the voting system. To argue that fraud would prevail is a weak argument. The system if designed properly should protect against this.

2. You say it would cost a fortune. I don't know and you don't know how much it would cost. again its speculation. of course it would cost a chunk of money but why cant this be explored and costed and tendered for to a private company. If done right it might not cost a fortune. If its determined that it would cost a fortune and would bring no benefits then stay as we are but shouldn't it at least be explored instead of shot down?

3. Don't get your last paragraph. Its nonsense and again simplistic speculation. I would like to think there would be some form of debate as part of deciding whether or not to proceed with e-voting. I would like to hear all of the arguments for and against and then make a decision, whether or not to at least explore the idea, based on the evidence.
 
Last edited:
jim said:
1. Re fraud - surely the current manual system is open to fraud in terms of counting votes.
Click to expand...

How, exactly? All counting is done in public and is tallied by observers. Recount results rarely deviate from original counts by more than a few dozen votes out of tens of thousands.

An online system would allow me to cast votes for everyone in my house. It's a major problem with the postal vote system in Britain.
 
moneybox said:
As per my link above 123 other countries have provisions in place for their citizens who live abroad to vote so what's so special about Ireland that they can't do the same?

Hundreds of thousands of us were forced to emigrate throughout our most recent recession
Click to expand...

100s of '000s would greatly skew the results nationally - that's your answer.
 
Iv never been involved in the counting process so I don't know exactly how it works. as I mentioned above they probably do have safeguards to prevent fraud. but given that it is a manual process it is inherently more risky than an automated process. Collusion between two individuals could result in fraud. its probably unlikely that it would happen but if it did it would have sever consequences potentially and therefore is a significant risk. Don't ask me how exactly 2 individuals would collude...but suffice to say its counting of votes by humans with oversight in place...that to me equates to a risk of collusion....and don't ask me what the motivation etc would be for collusion...

an online system designed properly would not allow you to cast a vote for anyone other than yourself. im not going to get into how it could be designed but I don't think its rocket science given that we already, as iv mentioned a few times, do a lot of sensitive tasks online. one pps number equals one vote, for example....to prevent me from using other peoples pps numbers to vote however I liked there could be surety questions attached to the log in, for example.

In any case fraud is just one aspect and I still think its arguable that an automated system designed properly would be less prone to fraud than a manual system. There are a bunch of other reasons why I think an online system would be better. Wouldn't it be more transparent also and the results a lot more auditable...and auditable in real time given that its automated? Yes there may be some built in margin for error but the result would be quickly established, fully auditable, very reliable etc.

regarding allowing our folks living abroad to vote - this is another debate different to my OP...
 
Setanta you may be right but how on earth is that any sort of a argument for not having e-voting given all of the advantages it could have? by that logic you are saying stuff the possible advantages such as cost, reliability, conveneience, flexibility, transparency, auditability etc.....its more fun doing it the manual way!

I completely accept Ceist Beags comment above though and with that in mind maybe we should stick with the current process. Just wanted to get peoples thoughts.
 
Last edited:
jim,s question was on e-voting .

I would strongly oppose e-voting.
I am of the opinion that there is something personal in taking the (bother) to go and physically vote and gives a feeling of giving your input.

Electronically? I would be worried that it could easily descend into a last minute (Big Brother) type hit the button vote or gets caught on what issue hits the election @the last minute, rather than a more rounded vote..
 
I think it would be more convenient if you could vote at any polling station in your constituency though. They would need a backoffice online system to keep track of what votes have been used across the constituency though, and maybe the option should only be available if you have your polling card and you should expect to be challenged for identification.
 
jim said:
Iv never been involved in the counting process so I don't know exactly how it works. as I mentioned above they probably do have safeguards to prevent fraud. but given that it is a manual process it is inherently more risky than an automated process. Collusion between two individuals could result in fraud. its probably unlikely that it would happen but if it did it would have sever consequences potentially and therefore is a significant risk. Don't ask me how exactly 2 individuals would collude...but suffice to say its counting of votes by humans with oversight in place...that to me equates to a risk of collusion....and don't ask me what the motivation etc would be for collusion...
Click to expand...

I'm afraid this is just speculative rubbish. You say yourself that you have no idea how a count is done and then go on to put out pure trash as a scenario.

For information, all boxes are opened in the presence of a returning officer and a horde of tallymen representing the candidates. All votes are counted as a total and are then counted in bundles of 100 for each candidate. These bundles are checked, rechecked and weighed to ensure that they are correct. Bundles are then individually tracked as they move through and around the count process. While errors can and do occur, there is ZERO chance of electoral fraud taking place.

Such safeguards are simply not available with an electronic system. If you going to advocate an electronic system, don't use fraud as a risk in doing so.
 
Tallpaul I don't know how you can say there is zero chance of fraud. given the process you just described it sounds inefficient and certainly prone to fraud. an automated counting system would be efficient and I don't see how fraud would more likely if it was designed properly. I take your point that fraud would be unlikely.
 
Jim,

Having been around counts , there is a very very small chance for fraud.
There is absolutely no doubt that an electronic system would be more efficient.
I just can,t see electronic systems getting to that level of certainty.
As an example ,apparently even encoded systems can be hacked by (law) agencies and given the speed in which electronics are moving , i might be able to do it myself shortly !
 
How would you secure an online voting system from fraud? When cyber espionage services are available so cheaply, it would be very easy to arrange massive manipulation of the results.

In terms of security, how do you propose each individual in a household is confirmed 100% to be who they say, and how do you confirm with 100% certainty that no one else is observing or influencing their vote? And given successive government's abject failures in implementing IT systems, what makes us think they could ever get this right?
 
Re e-voting, could we not just let the operators of the Lotto run it? Since it seems to never make a difference who gets elected anyway, why not just pick them out randomly & save us all the bother?
 
  • Like
Reactions: jim
Leo said:
How would you secure an online voting system from fraud? When cyber espionage services are available so cheaply, it would be very easy to arrange massive manipulation of the results.

"In terms of security, how do you propose each individual in a household is confirmed 100% to be who they say, and how do you confirm with 100% certainty that no one else is observing or influencing their vote? And given successive government's abject failures in implementing IT systems, what makes us think they could ever get this right?
Click to expand...
Leo said:
"



And given successive government's abject failures in implementing IT systems, what makes us think they could ever get this right?
Click to expand...

This is a shockingly poor and pessimistic argument. If done right it would work but it would have to be done right. you cant argue against e-voting on the basis that the government might mess it up!!(although admittedly they probably would).

"How would I secure an online system from fraud" - im not sure but an IT/Cyber expert would know. As a layman I go back to the numerous examples of individuals already using the internet to make sensitive and fraud-prone transactions. also by having a secure log-in your half ways there. In the same way with internet banking or with the revenue or with any payment platform one must "prove" who they are. Security questions could be used as a basic form of verification but there are more sophisticated ways of doing it.


"how do you confirm with 100% certainty that no one else is observing or influencing their vote?"
Sure anyone can influence or observe anyone's votes as things stand....

I suppose by posting this I just wanted to get a sense of what peoples thoughts were on it because to me it seemed like a no-brained. but having heard a few views it is apparent that this would be tricky to implement and could pose difficulties not least the general reluctance that there seems to be out there to bring it in.
 
Last edited:
moneybox said:
As per my link above 123 other countries have provisions in place for their citizens who live abroad to vote so what's so special about Ireland that they can't do the same?
Click to expand...
Americans can vote if they live abroad but they also have to make a US tax return, no matter where they live.
 
I think the main issue I would have with an online voting mechanism would be how to protect the Secret Ballot Act. Jim the suggestions you have made and the comparison to online banking etc all work on the premise of identifying a person before allowing them to vote, how does a system then "forget" the person to allow the vote into an anonymous pool for results? I am sure the technology exists to show only what we want it to but a determined person could find the digital trail is they really wanted to.

Added to that, the potential for attacks, etc, the need for independent verification, reasonable internet connection, etc. If someone is away for whatever reason a postal vote is readily available and is not difficult to obtain.

I have worked as a Presiding Officer and count staff. The system while manual and cumbersome does protect people. All the ballot papers have a serial number on them which is duplicated on the counterfoil, these are checked by the count staff, each ballot paper is stamped or perforated on the day of the poll, the stamp used is known to very few people before the day. These are both measures to prevent stuffing the ballot box. Anything with the wrong stamp would be discarded as a spoiled vote. For a poll result to be affected a significant number of ballots would have to be interfered with and this would also be noticed, the papers when checked would show they were invalid rather quickly. All work in a count centre is done under the watchful eye of official count staff, Returning officer and his team, tallymen, reporters, candidates and other interested parties, the opportunity to interfere with the count is slim.

Call me cynical but I think if the government, or more likely the advertisers who would pay good money for access to the voting preferences of a particular group of people had enough money the integrity of the ballot would be very much in doubt. Far greater risks in my opinion than the paper and pen model we currently use. Each and every ballot is verifiable back to the polling station/presiding officer it was issued to and each table that is set up has a tally of how many votes it issued. And in the event of a close result there is the opportunity to recount and re-examine each vote, which is not available with e-voting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top