[E-voting] First draft press release

[Margaret McGaley]

I think calling for a cost-benefit analysis is within the scope of what 
we can comment on, but if you guys disagree we can take it out of the 
press release. I can see where you're coming from by saying cost is 
unimportant once we have a trustworthy system, but we *do* have an 
acceptably trustworthy system (paper and pen), and I think the cost of 
making this system acceptably trustworthy would need to be justified imho.

Margaret


A.J.Delaney at brighton.ac.uk wrote:

>Mags et. al.,
>On Wed, 2006-07-05 at 15:08 +0100, Margaret McGaley wrote:
>  
>
>>In response to Minister Roche's determination to continue with the 
>>introduction of this system, Ms McGaley highlighted highlighted the 
>>expense the necessary modifications would entail. "We should not decide 
>>to use this system without doing a full cost-benefit analysis. The 
>>changes laid out by the commission are extensive. They will require a 
>>significant investment of both time and money to implement, and we need 
>>to ask if this system is worth it. The €60 million that has been spent 
>>to date is gone and the futher investment of several years, and millions 
>>of euro, will not bring it back."
>>    
>>
>Is it our position to argue about cost?  I personally don't care how
>much the system costs once it is trustworthy.  However, my intuition (as
>a software engineer) suggests that making this system safe will cost
>much, much more than using our current paper based system.
>  
>