[E-voting] Second draft press release

Casey, Dermot (GE Cons Fin) Dermot.Casey at ge.com
Wed Jul 5 16:44:43 IST 2006


[NOT FOR RELEASE]

Irish Citizens for Trustworthy Evoting (ICTE) today welcomed the release
of the Commission on Electronic Voting's second report on the secrecy
and accuracy of the Nedap/Powervote e-voting system. "We are satisfied
that the report vindicates our concerns about this e-voting system,
particularly the need for a voter verified paper audit trail (p153,4)
and the need to entirely replace the vote-management section of the
system (p14)" said Margaret McGaley, spokesperson for ICTE.

In response to Minister Roche's determination to continue with the
introduction of this system, Ms McGaley highlighted the expense that the
necessary modifications would entail. "We should not decide to use this
system without doing a full cost-benefit analysis both for the system as
a whole, and from this point on.
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 EUR60 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."

"We are particularly happy to see, on page 153 and 154, that the
commission have explicitly stated that the paper system is superior to
the chosen system because the latter does not provide a voter verified
paper audit trail." 
Said Ms McGaley. 

ICTE maintains that no electronic voting system can be trustworthy
unless it includes a paper-based voter verified audit trail (VVAT), a
view shared by the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) and the
Irish Computer Society (ICS). According to Fergal Daly of ICTE: "After
[frequent/many] bad experiences without it, many states in the US have
now enacted laws mandating VVAT. We should learn from their mistakes
rather than repeating them."

[INSERT POSSIBLY]
"The safety of the Irish electoral system should not be subject to a
political face-saving exercise. It is to late to review the elections
already run with by a system for which the commission found 'little
evidence to support a claim that the software is dependable'" noted
Dermot Casey of ICTE further stating that "Taoiseach Bertie Ahern has
commented that Ireland leads the world in global software exports, it is
time now to drop this shoddy second rate imported system and design a
safe, secure and reliable system using our world class expertise"
  

>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: e-voting-bounces at lists.stdlib.net 
>>[mailto:e-voting-bounces at lists.stdlib.net] On Behalf Of Fergal Daly
>>Sent: 05 July 2006 16:33
>>To: Margaret McGaley
>>Cc: e-voting at lists.stdlib.net
>>Subject: Re: [E-voting] Second draft press release
>>
>>On 05/07/06, Margaret McGaley <mmcgaley at cs.nuim.ie> wrote:
>>> [NOT FOR RELEASE]
>>>
>>> Irish Citizens for Trustworthy Evoting (ICTE) today welcomed the 
>>> release of the Commission on Electronic Voting's second 
>>report on the 
>>> secrecy and accuracy of the Nedap/Powervote e-voting 
>>system. "We are 
>>> satisfied that the report vindicates our concerns about 
>>this e-voting 
>>> system, particularly the need for a voter verified paper 
>>audit trail 
>>> (p153,4) and the need to entirely replace the 
>>vote-management section 
>>> of the system (p14)" said Margaret McGaley, spokesperson for ICTE.
>>>
>>> In response to Minister Roche's determination to continue with the 
>>> introduction of this system, Ms McGaley highlighted the 
>>expense that 
>>> the necessary modifications would entail. "We should not 
>>decide to use 
>>> this system without doing a full cost-benefit analysis both for the 
>>> system as a whole, and from this point on.
>>> 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 EUR60 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."
>>>
>>> "We are particularly happy to see, on page 153 and 154, that the 
>>> commission have explicitly stated that the paper system is 
>>superior to 
>>> the chosen system because the latter does not provide a 
>>voter verified 
>>> paper audit trail."
>>> said
>>> Ms McGaley. ICTE maintains that no electronic voting system can be 
>>> trustworthy unless it includes a paper-based voter verified audit 
>>> trail (VVAT), a view shared by the Association for 
>>Computing Machinery 
>>> (ACM) and the Irish Computer Society (ICS). According to 
>>Fergal Daly 
>>> of ICTE: "After [frequent/many] bad experiences without it, many 
>>> states in the US have now enacted laws mandating VVAT. We 
>>should learn 
>>> from their mistakes rather than repeating them."
>>
>>"After repeated failures of electronic voting systems, many 
>>states in the US are enacting laws mandating VVAT. We should 
>>learn from their mistakes rather than repeating them."
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>http://evoting.cs.may.ie/
>>



More information about the E-voting mailing list