Workshop on e-Voting and
e-Government in the UK
Edinburgh
27-28 February 2006
Edging Towards
Modernisation of the Electoral
Process in Scotland
Jeff Hawkins, Returning Officer
East Renfrewshire Council
• Background/recent history of
developments in Scotland
• Explanation of the current e:counting
project
• Some practical considerations
• Implications of a successful e:count
The arcane and incremental nature of
UK electoral law and, indeed, electoral
practice – means that voting procedures
have changed very little in over 100
years.
(The implementation of Electronic
Voting in the UK. A Research Report
2002)
Emphasis in recent times in changing
the manner in which we elect people –
ELECTORAL SYSTEMS
rather than
Modernising
administration
PROCESS
the
conduct
of elections –
and
THE
Scottish Local Government (Elections) Act
2002 confers power to pilot
• All postal ballots
• Voting on more than one day or a day other than a
Thursday
• Early voting
• Extended voting hours
• Mobile polling stations
• Electronic voting or counting
Representation of The People Act 2000
Sections 10 and 11 conferred power to
pilot in England and Wales
May 2002 - 30 Pilots
- 17 tested forms of electronic
voting or counting
Department of Constitutional Affairs
Electoral Pilots
May 2006 -
16 pilots
4 provide for E:counting
Electronic counting of ballots will build on
past work and test how this can be refined
to ensure confidence and support future
use of technology to gain efficiencies in
the administration of elections. This will
also enable us to identify how technology
can support counting in the different
voting systems used on local authority and
regional elections.
Extract from evaluation report
Scottish all postal pilot (2002)
of
a
“There was consensus by stakeholders
that any combined elections, e.g. local
government and Scottish Parliament
elections, would need to be CONDUCTED
IN A CONVENTIONAL MANNER for
logistical and legislative reasons ….
Moreover, to conduct 2 or more elections
in parallel by different means would be
logistically and cost prohibitive”
Combined Elections 2007
STV real driver for change
Views of Professional Associations
Decoupling
Electronic Counting
Two previous
Scotland
combined
elections
in
“Given the complexity of counting votes
under the 3 electoral systems to be used
for the London elections (in 2000), it was
possible that a traditional manual count
could take several days with increased
scope for error.”
Electronic counting at the London
elections, June 2004.
The Electoral
Commission.
STV totally new to –
Candidates/agents
Electoral administrators
Voters
STV is not a list based system
Observations of Northern Ireland Elections
EPIC AND LABYRINTHINE!
Eire, European & Local Elections
June 2004
Commission on Electronic Voting : -
CONCLUSION – “On the basis of its review of
expert reports, submissions received and other
relevant information to date, the Commission
finds that it is not in a position to recommend with
the requisite degree of confidence the use of the
chosen system at elections in June 2004 …
The Commission has not been able to satisfy itself
as to the accuracy of secrecy of the system for
the following reasons:-
• SYSTEM TESTING – the tests of the
system carried out to date are insufficient
to establish its reliability for use at
elections in Ireland in June.
• SOFTWARE VERSIONS – there is not
sufficient time before the June elections
for a full system testing of the final version
of the software that would be necessary
before it could be used in these elections
and the final version of the software is not
available for testing at this point in time.
New Zealand 2004
STV/Electronic Counting
Post Event Review (KPMG)
The complexity and risks associated with the
project were not fully appreciated by those
involved.
Project management was inadequate in a
number of areas –
• risk management
• technical specification
• resource analysis
• testing and reporting
“The process was more complex than
in other elections as a result of
needing to include both FPTP and STV
information ….. The majority of project
time
was
spent
on
logistics
management versus the development
and testing of the system to process
the STV votes …..”
“Preparations for the electronic count in
London (in 2004) began more than TWO
AND A HALF YEARS BEFORE the election
and the day of the count. Evaluation of the
first London elections in May 2000, which
used electronic counting for the first time,
informed the development of proposals to
implement an improved electronic counting
solution for 2004”
“There is surely time between now and
2007 to ensure that software necessary for
a STV electronic count can be developed
and satisfactorily tested”
Extract from SOLAR submission, October
2003, on Local Governance (Scotland) Bill.
Steering Group for Scottish Parliament
and Local Elections 2007
Scottish Executive
Scottish Parliament
Scotland Office
Electoral Commission
Convention of Scottish Local
Authorities
SOLAR
SOLACE
AEA
Sub Groups Legislation
Training
Voter Awareness
E:Counting *
*Tender Evaluation Panel
Electronic Counting
Timetable
Invitation to Tender (ITT) issue
29 August 2005
Return date for ITT
21 October 2005
Short Listed supplier presentations
10 November 2005
Decision to recommend preferred bidder
30 November 2005
Contract Award
January 2006
Trials for 32 local authorities
13 February –
3 March 2006
April/May 2006
Acceptance Test
Decision to Proceed with E:counting for
3 May 2007
May/June 2006
Weighted Inclusive Gregory
(WIG)
6, 10 and 32 count centre options
12 hour timescale
Visibility/Transparency
(Verification)
Basis of Trials
Content
Observation
Next Stage (?)
Other Big Decisions • Timing
of
Count
(Electoral
Commission January 2006 : Review
of the timing of counts at Scottish
Parliamentary and local government
elections)
• Number of Count Centres
(Efficient government considerations
versus local democracy)
Practical considerations • Size of ballot paper
• Number of ballot boxes
• Power capacity of counting venues
• Standardisation of adjudication process
Post 2007
Consolidation v Multi Channel E:voting
Halfway House
Electronic Voting/Counting in a
Polling Station or equivalent
“It is imperative that if E:voting and
counting are to have political and public
confidence that the security of the
process must not be compromised ….
For this reason it is suggested that the
present practice of having a presiding
officer and polling clerk within a polling
station cannot be dispensed with.”
Co-ordinated Online
Register of Electors (CORE)
Gradual Process
Leave Internet, TV, phone and
text voting for another day