Seanad debates

Tuesday, 11 May 2004

Electoral (Amendment) Bill 2004: Committee Stage (Resumed).

 

6:00 pm

Photo of Michael McCarthyMichael McCarthy (Labour)

I move amendment No. 23:

In page 10, lines 1 and 2, to delete subsection (5).

The provision as it stands is too bureaucratic. If, for whatever reason, a voter is unable to or has not cast a vote within what the Bill terms "a reasonable time", he or she may not be entitled to apply for a second vote. Since e-voting was shelved because of the report of the commission many people have told me that they had not intended to vote. While I will not categorise, I can understand the fears of some about the electronic voting system. Voters do not want to look stupid if they cannot operate a machine at a polling station or hold up a queue or otherwise draw attention to themselves in an embarrassing manner.

There is also another issue regarding the term "reasonable time". The period is at the discretion of the presiding officer, which is like asking how long is a piece of string. A reasonable time may be defined by an unreasonable person and Members will have witnessed incidents in polling stations over the years. If there are issues or difficulties, only common sense and reasonable behaviour can iron them out. Staff at polling stations work from early morning until late evening and may be tired, hungry or even incoherent. Despite this, such staff may be charged with the authority to decide what is a reasonable time.

While I understand a similar provision exists in regard to the existing legislation for Dáil elections, it is just as objectionable in this instance. From the perspective of voters who do not wish to be embarrassed at polling stations, the removal of the obligation to vote in a reasonable time would encourage voters to go to the polls. This provision is too bureaucratic.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.