Dick Roche (Wicklow, Fianna Fail)

It is difficult to get them. One could extrapolate from detailed figures in the first volume of the census to work out who is eligible to vote and what the numbers should be. The results can be precise. It would be a substantial exercise to carry out and the Senator has asked a good question. If the exercise was carried out, one could then objectively highlight where the biggest errors lie with regard to local authorities.

With regard to Senators Moylan and Brady's points, both are correct in pointing out the huge changes in living style in the State. Multi-occupancy is now at a rate not seen since the clearance of the slums. This is a reality. At one time the tenement living was the style of living in Dublin and a different style of multiple occupation is now evident. It is very difficult for some people to get into these places, and one might spend half a day talking to intercoms and not knowing exactly to whom one is talking. This frustrating experience has been had by all. In these cases and taking into account the turnover evident in apartments, it is very difficult to keep the register updated. I accept that a challenge exists on this issue and it would be foolhardy for any Minister to say otherwise.

Senator Browne pointed out that it should be possible to automatically remove deceased people's names from the electoral register. I do not wish to sound impertinent, but this is one of the attractions of a totally electronic system which has registration, voting, etc., included on it. I do not wish to dwell on this as it is a different controversy for another day.

The position in Northern Ireland has been mentioned because people there have had significant and spectacular problems with voting. Much money has been spent there to get the process right. A system that uses PPS numbers, or their equivalent, has been introduced there. Before I discuss the usage of PPS numbers I will consider some actions on this issue that have taken place in the State.

Over the past 30 years, different Governments have given much time to voting and elections. Discussion has taken place on how parties are funded, and legislation has been introduced governing contributions and spending. Welcome changes have been introduced to the supplementary register that introduce a degree of flexibility. I agree that people going on holidays who pay taxes and are registered voters should be allowed some flexibility.

The Electoral (Amendment) Act 2002, which introduced the change on the supplementary register, also brought in another change which has not been implemented on the ground. It was suggested that more attention should be paid in voting stations to who actually votes. Members know from their own experience whether I am correct to say that this has not been put into effect. The guidelines issued suggested that at least 25% of those voting should produce identity documents. I know this guideline was not observed in my constituency. I am quite certain that most of the people present here could indicate that it was not observed in their respective constituencies either. I have pointed out to officials in a voting station that a person had voted more than once. On that occasion I was told by staff that the person had been in two or three times. I indicated that the person should be challenged but he was not challenged. An electoral fraud had occurred with knowledge, and people were slightly intimidated. The polling staff are not paid a big salary and intimidation or threats of it can be real.

With regard to the usage of PPS numbers, this issue is primarily a matter for the Department of Social and Family Affairs. The PPS numbers are possessed by that Minister. Legal advice must be taken on any proposals carried through on the issue. I can see the attraction, which is self-evident, but advice must be taken nonetheless. The concern of where the PPS numbers would be used is also evident. I see the attraction of the number being used when a person registers to vote, as the number is unique. Some access to the library of PPS numbers would have to be facilitated in order to counter-check them. I have queries, incidentally, about the layout of the voter registration form as it is not conducive to clarity. If a PPS number is used to register a voter, it will be a meaningless exercise unless a link between the electoral registration office and the PPS number database is provided. That should not be difficult, as it does not involve rocket science. The connection could be made but issues will be raised, which will require clearance from the Data Protection Commissioner. He has shown interest in what goes on the forms and, as a result of a number observations that were made, the forms were changed but not improved.

The second issue is whether the PPS number should be used for verification at the polling station, which would be ideal in many ways. If an individual had a unique number for voting and a PPS number, in theory, particularly if electronic voting was introduced, he or she could vote anywhere in the State. We are trying to make it attractive for people to register and to make it easier to vote. On election day we are interested in our own results but we have a wider interest in democracy. If we are all interested in democracy as opposed to partisan results, we must make it easy for people to register.

A number of years ago I acted as an international poll observer during the Nicaraguan general election following its civil war. There had been blood and mayhem in the country, yet the Organisation of American States, which organised the election campaign, engaged in voter registration up to four or five days prior to the poll. It was a traumatic period in the life of that nation. However, if that could be done in Nicaragua, why can it not be done in Ireland? We must make it easier for people to vote and we must make sure the voter register is audited so those who should not be on it are removed.

I refer to the issue of security. If a PPS number was used to audit whether the person presenting at the polling station was entitled to vote, it would have attractions but it would also raise issues regarding how that procedure should be handled. The best way to ensure people who present are entitled to vote is to check their identification but an on-line connection between the polling station and the PPS number database will be necessary. A random check of 25% of those presenting is a better way to go.

I am pleased with the debate. During Question Time in the Dáil earlier this week, I stated I was open to suggestions from all political parties on this issue. Amendments to the register cannot be introduced without cross-party consensus because it is central to democracy. It is not a partisan electoral issue, about which we should gouge each other. However, we should combine all the experience of Members in both Houses to resolve this problem. My Department will encourage local authorities to take voter registration more seriously but improved guidelines and arrangements must be put in place to ensure the current scenario does not recur.

Senator McDowell referred to figures. Whether the register is 300,000 or 800,000 in error, it is wrong. We should not be in this position in the 21st century, given all the available technology. It is absolutely appalling, as Senator O'Rourke stated, that having been advised to attend a Garda station, people are told by gardaí they know nothing about voter registration. Such an offhand attitude, whether it manifests itself in a council office or a Garda station, is unacceptable and it is utterly appalling. Those who pay taxes are our bosses and we should serve them. That attitude is not good enough.

All local authorities should make the voting register available on-line so it can be scrutinised. Many people use the Internet, particularly young people like those who approached Senator Bradford, and we should encourage them to vote. If they could access the voting register electronically, they could forward a note to the local authority saying, "My name is X, my address is Y and my telephone number is Z. Please let me have a voter registration form and I will register". Addressing these issues does not involve rocket science. There has been a lack of willingness to take them on board but I am willing to do so. I am willing to work in unison with parties and politicians across the spectrum because that is the best way to resolve this issue. We all have an interest in doing so.

Slackness on the part of local authorities has crept in in recent years. Previously, a grant was provided to upgrade the register. The Government then decided, following the achievement of political consensus, that a general grant would be provided to local authorities to given them flexibility rather than ring-fencing allocations for different sections, as had been the case. The updating of the register is supposed to be undertaken with that grant but I suspect it is being done on a desultory basis.

Voter registration is a lively issue among Members across the political spectrum. If local authorities cannot clean up the mess, I am determined to examine alternative measures to ensure the register is properly updated. If the arrangements in place are not working, we must find out why that is case, whether they can be fixed and, if not, we must examine ways to do the job better. The amendments address a fruitful issue to which we should return in the autumn. I am willing to take up Senator Bradford's request to ask the relevant committee to discuss the issue. We will have a much better system if we combine our knowledge in this area. I thank Senator McHugh for the amendments but he will fully understand I cannot accept them under this legislation. He has given us much food for thought.