Friday, November 24, 2006

Lost in e-Space

Questions asked about security and probity of e-Voting centers go unanswered

The VEC has reported that it has already undertaken analysis and processed voting result from e-Voting centres which raises a number of questions such as what sort of analysis has been undertaken and who has access to this data and how secure is the information?

The VEC assures us that it is secure but will not say what sort of reports and analysis have been undertaken. It is one thing to collect statistical information on e_voting system but it is another if the results of the e-voting have been analysed in the absence of public scrutiny and independent review.

It is wrong to ascertain the results of voting before the close of the polls on Saturday 6:00PM November 25, 2006. This sort of information is readily open to abuse and goes well beyond the sort of sampling you would expect from public opinion poll.

If the information is purely of a statistical nature (i.e.. No results or analysis of voting has been undertaken) then why has this statistical information not been made public.

Information on the number of people who have voted, the number of postal vote application and pre-poll voting should be readily available and published daily on the VEC web site. It's akin to holding an election and not knowing teh total number enrolled.

The main problem as we see it is that the processing of this information is undertaken in e-Space and, it would appear, not subject to proper public scrutiny.

Having asked questions as to the type of analysis and summary data produced the VEC have gone silent.

We have already expressed concern that postal voting application statistics are not readily available and are missing from the reports we have received. Lost in e-Space.

Much more review and analysis is required of our e-voting system before public confidence is assured. The Key to maintaining public confidence is the publication of all statistical data so as to ensure the conduct of elections is open and transparent and subject to proper scrutiny. Something that is missing when information is denied or not available. It is not good enough to just say "Trust us".

No comments:

Post a Comment