Mr. Domhnall McGlacken-Byrne:

A good few issues have been raised. In terms of the first issue of confidence in the electoral system, I very much echo what has just been said. People believe the results are very robust, but I personally have had a lot of experience of it and I have a very low level of confidence in how we put the register together. When one uses the word "tampering" online, in a sentence to do with voting, people think of e-voting and immediately say, "Oh no." Online voting is very different from including the online option in the process leading up to voting. Multiple voting hurts confidence in the system as well.

Compulsory voting was mentioned. Call me radical, but I think it is a great idea. In Australia a person can be fined $20 for not voting and one can choose to spoil it if one wants, but perhaps that is a discussion for a different day. Compulsory voting is a cracking idea. If nothing else, voter registration as an opt-out makes infinite sense. In 2008, the Geary Institute compiled a report on this issue which circled the drain and eventually came back to the need for an ID number. There are issues with using PPS numbers and there are issues with using driver licences, obviously. The institute wondered whether an ID number would impinge on people's privacy and whether we were ready for that step, which I think is a bit silly. Taxes and lots of things impinge on one's privacy. A centralised ID number is, unfortunately, something that must be considered very seriously.