Simon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)

This evening, for the first time, three Opposition parties have united on a Private Members' motion — three parties representing more than 40% of the electorate. We are not playing politics with this issue, as has been said by a number of Government Deputies. We have put down a motion to express our serious reservations about the proposed introduction of electronic voting and the approach the Minister has taken on this issue. We have done so because there is a genuine concern that mistakes are being made in the matter of a fundamental democratic procedure — voting. The right to cast one's vote in secrecy and to expect it to be registered and properly counted is fundamental to any democracy.

Why did the Government not approach the issue of electronic voting on an all-party basis? Do we have a Government that is so arrogant it thinks it is all-knowing? This is about fundamentally changing the way in which people vote. Should a Government be spending €40 million of taxpayers' money rushing in a new system against the wishes of Opposition spokespersons, who must sit there as they are told the system is foolproof? Are we as Opposition politicians supposed to sit on our hands and refrain from raising valid concerns about the system? Changing a voting system should not be a party political issue, but Fianna Fáil and the Progressive Democrats have made it so. It should be decided on by the House collectively. Unfortunately, that has not happened.

Why has the Government waited until today to decide to establish an independent panel to verify the secrecy and accuracy of arrangements proposed for electronic voting? Surely this panel should have been set up before the money was committed and the system approved, and before a PR consultant was handed the contract for promoting and informing people about the system. The machines and the system have already been launched, but we are only now setting up an independent panel to verify accuracy. If ever there was a case of putting the cart before the horse, this was it. The Government knows this but it is too stubborn and arrogant to admit it and change tack. When is this independent panel supposed to report on the secrecy and accuracy of the system? How can the panel allay concerns about the much talked-about absence of a paper trail, should there be a problem that requires a recount?

Why have we not insisted on the introduction of a system that has a voter-verified paper audit trail? Why are we being asked to put all our trust in a system that cannot be checked and checked again, if necessary, with a physical paper trail? In various parts of the world there are models that use paper trails so that in the unlikely event — I accept it is extremely unlikely — of a problem arising, a proper back-up is available. No system is entirely flawless or entirely predictable. We were told that the electronic voting system in the House was flawless, but it got a virus which necessitated its being turned off for a number of weeks until it was fixed. What is the downside to a paper trail? I do not see one. We have been told by the makers of the machines we are planning to introduce that it is possible to introduce a paper trail alongside the voting system they have outlined. Why is the Government not insisting on that? I am not opposed to the introduction of electronic voting, nor in my view is the majority on this side of the House, although some Members have genuine reservations. However, we are opposed to the Government introducing a system that has been questioned by many and about which we have genuine concerns. If the Government is to bring forward an e-voting system, it should be done properly and the genuine concerns of Members should be allayed.

See this speech in context