=?GB2312?B?UmU6IFtFLXZvdGluZ10goa5QYXBlciB0cmFpbKGvIHdhbnRlZCBmb3Igdm90ZQ==?=

Dr J Pelan J.Pelan at gatsby.ucl.ac.uk
Tue Apr 18 17:16:58 IST 2006


On Sun, 16 Apr 2006, Adrian Colley wrote:

> On 4/16/06, Catherine Ansbro <cansbro at eircom.net> wrote:
> > http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2091-2137056,00.html
> > [...]
> > A verifiable paper
> > trail is also considered best practice by the European commission.
> 
> When did the Commission announce that?  I missed it.

AFAIK, there is a European eGovernment 'Good Practice Framework' but it 
isn't quite the same as saying the contents are Commission approved;

 http://www.egov-goodpractice.org/

This contains a database of case studies and examples of what are claimed 
to be 'good practice' in eGovernment/e-services as judged here;

 http://www.e-europeawards.org/

 "The applications submitted for the eEurope Awards are evaluated and 
 ranked by an independent jury composed of eminent experts from all over 
 Europe in the relevant fields."

Such opaque, unaccountable processes don't exactly fill me with confidence 
but its par for the course in these days of sofa style government and the 
revolving doors between industry and the civil service/government. I also
wonder how many of these 'studies' are written by commercial interests.
Maybe I'm being unfair.

On the other hand, if there is a document floating about suggesting that 
VVAT is the way forward (and they advocate actually using the audit trail) 
then I'm all in favour. I wonder are they referring to the Portugese 
experience;

  http://www.votoelectronico.pt/index.php?lang=EN

--
John P.



More information about the E-voting mailing list