[E-voting] e Voting in the UK

Chris Guthrie chris.guthrie at beachpartnership.co.uk
Thu May 12 12:15:21 IST 2005


"As many have been pointing out here and elsewhere, the UK government
(national and local) is hell bent on introducing e-voting in all its most
dangerous of forms."

I work very closely with my local authority ( Blackburn with Darwen Borough
Council) here in the UK and am also have completed the first year of an Msc.
in eGovernance, in neither position have I ever heard the slightest notion
about the UK being hellbent on introducing evoting. There are various
national projects i.e. eCitizen etc but these are about acessible services
and their edelivery rather than any aspiations toward electronic voting.
Admiteddly a few local authorities have tried "smart" voting schemes but
they were shown to have a minimal effect on turnout. I think the next big
electoral debate in the UK is going to be about reform of the voting system
i.e. PR - but what form of PR? In light of this, I would say evoting won't
even make it on to the radar for a few years yet.
-----Original Message-----
From: e-voting-bounces at lists.stdlib.net
[mailto:e-voting-bounces at lists.stdlib.net]On Behalf Of
e-voting-request at lists.stdlib.net
Sent: 12 May 2005 12:00
To: e-voting at lists.stdlib.net
Subject: E-voting Digest, Vol 25, Issue 7


Send E-voting mailing list submissions to
	e-voting at lists.stdlib.net

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://lists.stdlib.net/mailman/listinfo/e-voting
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	e-voting-request at lists.stdlib.net

You can reach the person managing the list at
	e-voting-owner at lists.stdlib.net

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of E-voting digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. Re: Amazing article (Dr J Pelan)
   2. Re: Push to replace voting machines spurs confusion
      (Marian Beddill)
   3. Thunder Bay (Canada) may audit its e-voting machines and its
      paper ballots (Catherine Ansbro)
   4. Is the secret ballot really secret?  (Catherine Ansbro)
   5. Re: Is the secret ballot really secret? (Fergal Daly)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 13:14:34 +0100 (BST)
From: Dr J Pelan <J.Pelan at gatsby.ucl.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: [E-voting] Amazing article
To: Margaret McGaley <Margaret.McGaley at redbrick.dcu.ie>
Cc: e-voting at lists.stdlib.net
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0505111246230.1446 at crick.gatsby.ucl.ac.uk>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII


On Tue, 10 May 2005, Margaret McGaley wrote:

> I can't believe that this article was only published last month. It's
> all about how great evoting is and they're wondering when it'll finally
> be introduced. One deputy returning officer they spoke to is not worried
> about security, because he "did not get a single comment back about
> security concerns".

As many have been pointing out here and elsewhere, the UK government
(national and local) is hell bent on introducing e-voting in all its most
dangerous of forms. It will be foisted on the electorate with all the
precautions and safeguards that the postal voting system has, i.e. of the
level that would "disgrace a banana republic".

I am somewhat hopeful that the ongoing postal voting shenanigans will
raise awareness of the risks and it will increase resistance to e-voting
but this outcome is not assured. In fact, e-voting could be misleadingly
portrayed as the *solution* to these problems.

It would appear that every country must learn the lessons the hard way.

John P.



------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 11:34:35 -0700
From: Marian Beddill <beddill at nas.com>
Subject: Re: [E-voting] Push to replace voting machines spurs
	confusion
To: e-voting at lists.stdlib.net
Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20050511113157.0394b788 at mail.nas.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed;
	x-avg-checked=avg-ok-36611594

Unconfirmed, from a source:
>"A copy of the report can be found at http://www.vote.caltech.edu/. "

Where there is lots of related stuff.

Marian

At 5/9/2005  11:33 AM, you wrote:

>Anyone know anything about the recent MIT research mentioned here?
>Apparently people were slow to catch errors when comparing a paper ballot,
>but caught more errors when there was an audio playback. (Of course,
>there's no knowing an audio playback would be accurate, since you could
>arrange an audio playback that was the same as voter's intent, but
>different from what was recorded on the paper.) Maybe they used a paper
>ballot that had lots of different elections on it? It would be interesting
>to see the actual study.
>
>At least election officials are worrying because they can now see the need
>for a backup.
>
>Catherine
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
>
>http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-05-08-voting-machines_x.htm
>*Push to replace voting machines spurs confusion*
>By Jim Drinkard, USA TODAY


--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.11.6 - Release Date: 5/6/2005





------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Wed, 11 May 2005 20:08:38 +0100
From: Catherine Ansbro <cansbro at eircom.net>
Subject: [E-voting] Thunder Bay (Canada) may audit its e-voting
	machines and its paper ballots
To: Irish Citizens for Trustworthy Evoting <e-voting at lists.stdlib.net>
Message-ID: <42825836.2020606 at eircom.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed

http://www.chroniclejournal.com/story.shtml?id=27108
*2006 vote audit probable *

By Ward Holland - The Chronicle-Journal

May 11, 2005

The City of Thunder Bay will likely audit several ballots after the
November 2006 municipal election to ensure the electronic vote-counting
system is working properly.

Unless directed by council, I suspect we will be conducting a
post-election audit after the election, city clerk John Hannam said
Tuesday.

Hannam will write a report detailing how a post-election audit could be
done. The report will be presented to council by the end of June.

The City of Thunder Bays voting procedures have been questioned by some
people in the community since the last election.

On Nov. 10, 2003, a computer glitch caused some votes to be counted more
than once. The mistake was corrected and the returning officer said the
official vote count was accurate.

In response, resident Eric Leat requested through the courts a manual
recount of the ballots. In January 2004, Justice John Wright dismissed
Leats request.

However, Wright suggested the city may want to audit the performance of
the machines used to count the 2003 municipal election ballots.

I am not suggesting a complete recount, Wright said in 2004. I am
simply suggesting that a few polls might be selected at random . . . and
the votes for some of the candidates at those polls manually counted.

Rosalie Evans, the citys lawyer, said Tuesday that the city didnt have
an obligation to audit the 2003 ballots, noting the court hearing and
adding that the procedure the city used was fine.

Evans said the city welcomed any recommendations from the judge.

The city has never done a post-election audit, but employees have tested
the machines before elections take place, Hannam said. The city clerks
office oversees municipal elections.

Electronic vote-tabulating machines have been used in the 1997, 2000 and
2003 municipal elections.

The ballots for the 2003 election have been destroyed and, as a result,
an audit cannot be done, Hannam said. The Municipal Elections Act says
that ballots shall be destroyed 90 days after a municipal election.

Other aspects of the citys vote-counting system have been questioned.

Coun. Lawrence Timko said he would like the ballots counted manually. He
said he believes the method is cheaper than a computer system.

Hannam, who maintains the computer system is cheaper, said he wants to
continue using an electronic system to count votes.

Our opinion/A4




------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 00:12:40 +0100
From: Catherine Ansbro <cansbro at eircom.net>
Subject: [E-voting] Is the secret ballot really secret?
To: Irish Citizens for Trustworthy Evoting <e-voting at lists.stdlib.net>
Message-ID: <42829168.4030800 at eircom.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

http://www.sluggerotoole.com/archives/2005/05/is_the_secret_b.php
Is the secret ballot really secret?




------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Thu, 12 May 2005 11:51:37 +0100
From: Fergal Daly <fergald at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [E-voting] Is the secret ballot really secret?
To: Catherine Ansbro <cansbro at eircom.net>
Cc: Irish Citizens for Trustworthy Evoting <e-voting at lists.stdlib.net>
Message-ID: <87502996050512035174b0fcbc at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

I think this has been mentioned here before. The same information does
not exist in the irish system,

F

On 5/12/05, Catherine Ansbro <cansbro at eircom.net> wrote:
> http://www.sluggerotoole.com/archives/2005/05/is_the_secret_b.php
> Is the secret ballot really secret?
>
> _______________________________________________
> E-voting mailing list
> E-voting at lists.stdlib.net
> http://lists.stdlib.net/mailman/listinfo/e-voting
> http://evoting.cs.may.ie/
>



------------------------------

_______________________________________________
E-voting mailing list
E-voting at lists.stdlib.net
http://lists.stdlib.net/mailman/listinfo/e-voting


End of E-voting Digest, Vol 25, Issue 7
***************************************




More information about the E-voting mailing list