Pat Gallagher (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)

I thank Senators Bannon, Kitt, Quinn, Maurice Hayes, McCarthy, Brady, Terry and Brennan for their contributions to this debate.

We have debated the general concept of electronic voting on other occasions. The aspect of the system being considered today is important. In my introductory remarks, I clarified the reasons we are proceeding with the Bill. Although the Government has decided not to proceed with electronic voting on 11 June, the Bill contains other important provisions which mean that it needs to be passed by the Oireachtas by next Thursday. There will be serious problems if it is not enacted in time. The commission must be placed on a legal footing. Councillors who are employees of local authorities may be affected. I explained earlier that the Bill is important in so far as it relates to voting cards. I appreciate the views expressed by Senators, all of whom are in favour of electronic voting. We hope to use an electronic voting system at a future election. I look forward to the support of Senators in the future when we engage with the commission on any concerns it may have.

Senator Bannon asked why the Bill is still being considered. It provides for the establishment of the commission on a statutory basis and I appreciate the Senators' support for this. It also removes any doubt about local authority employees standing as candidates. Part 2 provides enabling provisions to allow electronic voting and counting at European, local and presidential elections and referenda. I note Senators' support for electronic voting and counting.

Senator Bannon referred to the results of pilot runs of the system in the 2002 election. However, I draw his attention to the contents of the commission's report on the results. The commission was pleased with the physical layout of the system and that it was straightforward and contributed to ease of use for both voters and election officials. Meath, Dublin West and Dublin North, the constituencies used in the pilot run, straddle the urban and rural regions. These constituencies are a microcosm of the rest of the country, and electronic voting was extremely successful in them. If those people were intelligent enough to use it, then there are no doubts about anyone else.

It is important to draw from general observations of the commission's report. It states "the system eliminates many inadvertent voter errors as well as the need for subjective judgment by returning officers". The report refers to the system deployed in pilot areas at the previous elections and the second Nice treaty referendum. The report also states "testing carried out by experts retained by the Commission on a significant sample of the voting machines deployed to returning officers confirms that the system can accurately and consistently record voter preferences". Those words are not mine or those of the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Cullen, but the commission's general observations on the secrecy, accuracy and testing of the chosen electronic voting system. On the three elections in the Dublin North, Dublin West and Meath constituencies, the report found "testing of the counting software carried out by experts retained by the Commission using voting information from pilot tests during previous elections in Ireland confirms that it accurately counted the votes recorded at these elections".

The loss of funds for the equipment purchased was referred to by Senators. This is not a loss because the equipment is available for future use. It would be more apt to describe it as an investment in the future. The report indicated that more time was needed to test election management software. There were some concerns over external security requirements that are not directly linked with the equipment. Security protocols were developed for issue to the returning officer but were not available in time for the commission.

Senator Maurice Hayes referred to assisted voting for people with disabilities or visual or literacy problems but there are no changes to this. It was intended to have a detailed publicity and awareness campaign to inform voters and provide voting machines for the public to test. I do not have to tell seasoned Members about the system that is currently in place to assist some voters.

Senator McCarthy referred to radio advertisements that were broadcast after the Government's announcement that electronic voting would not proceed. I apologise for this occurring. There has been some misunderstanding between the various bodies involved. The Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government sent an instruction to all advertisers to cancel all broadcasts. However, the broadcasts happened inadvertently and were an error on the radio station's part. Outdoor advertising has been either covered or removed. The Department has followed up any cases of advertisements still running.

Senators raised the cost of the project. The costs were made public and were no hidden secret. Last week, in reply to a parliamentary question, the total estimated cost was given at €46.4 million, including VAT at 20%. The net cost is less. The machines will have a lifetime of 20 years after first use. I made the case both in the Seanad and the Dáil that these extra costs would be beneficial in the long term. As Senator Brady said, this is a once-off cost and the Government is satisfied there will be many benefits in the long run. The question of storage is a matter for returning officers and not for the Minister or the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. They have always been responsible for storage of ballot boxes and voting booths in the past and will now be responsible for the storage of election equipment. The costs for the European and general elections come from the Central Fund. Costs for local elections, either town or county, have always been the responsibility of the local authority.

Senator Maurice Hayes referred to the necessity to have a commencement clause. I draw his attention to section 1 which allows for this. Part 2, which deals with the introduction of electronic voting, will not be commenced without a favourable recommendation by the commission.

Senator Terry raised the results from the pilots in the last general election. In the report's general observations, the commission has no difficulty with the accuracy of those results. The returning officer for the Dublin area has publicly answered queries about procedures at the election. Senator Terry drew selectively from the report's executive summary. I refer her to the paragraph subsequent to that which she quoted, which states:

The Commission wishes to emphasise that its conclusion is not based on any finding that the system will not work, but on the finding that it has not been proven at this time to the satisfaction of the Commission that it will work.

The commission requires further time and the Government is only too pleased to give it that. The Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government will provide the commission with any information it requires.

Electronic voting is off the agenda until there are further reports from the commission and the commission has had an opportunity to carry out further testing. The Department worked closely with the international accredited institute for electronic voting, Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt. PTB has worked with the introduction of electronic voting in Germany, The Netherlands and now in Brest in France. There was also the successful pilot test in the last general election in a number of constituencies in Ireland. Of those surveyed on the pilot test, 87% said they were happy and had every confidence in it. The Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government has been pragmatic in taking on board the recommendations of the commission. Electronic voting will not now proceed. However, as I said, there are good, solid reasons for proceeding with the legislation at this stage and I have explained these adequately.