MPs say older Australians would be distrustful of electronic voting

Malcolm Turnbull and Bill Shorten have called for electronic voting in future elections.

MPs say older Australians would be distrustful of electronic voting

After an eight-day wait for an election result, Malcolm Turnbull and Bill Shorten have called for electronic voting in future elections, but some Government MPs think older Australians may be skeptical about e-voting.

The new push for the modernisation of Australia’s voting system comes on the heels of the Election 2016 saga, with the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) taking more than a week to tally enough votes for a result. In response, the Prime Minister and the Opposition Leader both mentioned finding an e-voting solution in their victory and concession speeches on Sunday.

But some MPs, including Victorian member for Gippsland, Darren Chester, have cautioned against introducing a switch to computer voting, saying it has the potential to alienate older voters. Mr Chester, in particular, said he was unconvinced that e-voting was the answer, warning that any such move would at least need to be rolled out gradually rather than “in a way that was intimidating or confusing to some people”.

“For some of our younger voters, there’s no doubt we would prefer that, as long as we didn’t make it compulsory at the early stages. A lot of older voters would be cynical about and would be uncomfortable with it,” Mr Chester told ABC radio.

Australia is not alone in its hesitance to introduce electronic voting. Many countries have toyed with the notion, but fear e-voting is too vulnerable to attack or manipulation. Currently, the eastern European nation, Estonia, is the only country to have adopted online electronic voting.

Victoria and New South Wales already have electronic voting options for disabled and remote voters.

Raymond Schippers, a senior security analyst from cyber security company Checkpoint, shares security doubts about electronic voting.

"The amount of attacks over the internet is insane. In an instant someone could compromise 10,000 computers. And without the voter ever knowing, someone could change their vote and no one would ever be able to confirm it was changed,” he said. "The system now is imperfect, there's no independent verification in place that could confirm each vote. But the possibility of infecting thousands of computers or having incorrect information is very real and a huge risk."

Read more at The Australian Financial Review
Read more at The Herald Sun

Opinion: Is e-voting a priority?

We wait eight days for a result. We’re presented with few workable policies about issues that affect real Australians daily. Yet one of the first things put on the agenda is e-voting? Surely we have more pressing issues currently confronting Australians.

Electronic voting may be the way forward in future elections but it does come with security risks. Until such time as these security issues are addressed, all Australians, not just older voters, may have reason to be distrustful of e-voting.

Besides, older Australians have already taken to online banking, purchasing and other activities that involve having personal details stored in servers the world over. Older Australians have the life experience to know how to adapt to technology. The problem with e-voting is the security issue, not the age of the voter. And, to older Australians, it’s probably fair to say that electronic voting is the least of their concerns.

If ‘those up on high’ are serious about innovation and moving forward, then how about getting the NBN sorted first? Or, more importantly, how about solving our superannuation dilemma and focusing on fairly funding education, health and social services? How about a resolution to our refugee crisis?

Australians sent a clear message to our two major parties in Election 2016. That message was ‘we are not happy with your priorities’. Many Australians were unimpressed with the election campaign, but the delayed result gave us, and our politicians, pause to ponder the future of our nation. Independent Senator Nick Xenophon probably summed it up best when he said that the delayed result may have brought out some "humility rather than hubris" in our MPs.

"Maybe pollies sweating for a few days makes them consider who they're there for in the first place," he said.

Our leaders coming out and complaining about the delay in a result is equivalent to them bemoaning that they didn’t get what they wanted when they wanted it. Well now they know how many of us feel. Maybe the delay was a blessing in disguise. Maybe now they’ll know that we’re not happy with the way they are running the show.

So Mr Turnbull, how about getting our priorities in order? You’ve got your result, now it’s your turn to deliver some positive results to your country.

Did the delayed result really bother you? Do you think that electronic voting is a priority the Government should address? Which policies should be placed at the top of the agenda? Would you be distrustful of e-voting?

RELATED ARTICLES





    COMMENTS

    To make a comment, please register or login
    Kaz
    12th Jul 2016
    10:12am
    Then work at making it safe! What about banks and PayPal and other safe sites - how do they do it?
    You have 3years!
    KSS
    12th Jul 2016
    12:45pm
    Seems to me the privacy issues are far overstated in regard to voting. People, it seems, are far more worried about someone else finding out how they vote than knowing the size of their bank account, credit card spending, tax returns or health history!
    Retired Knowall
    12th Jul 2016
    1:06pm
    It's 2016, get with the times.
    Getting to and lining up to vote should be ancient history.
    I have a MyGov account which gives me access to Medibank, ATO and Centrelink,no security issues there. eVoting is a no brainer.
    particolor
    12th Jul 2016
    5:46pm
    Only another step to add Voting to MyGov :-)
    MICK
    12th Jul 2016
    9:24pm
    How many times has your bank account been hacked? Mine neither.
    Because there are backups kept on a day to day basis and because you can create pretty secure systems it seems pretty safe. And of course It geeks would be watching too.
    Leon: your concerns about older voters are not really an issue. A hybrid would have to be introduced anyway as many older voters would not be able to find the on/off switch on a computer (chuckle...). Perhaps a few AEC centres could be operating for a week before election day and older folk who were computer illiterate could pre poll. Not a big deal!
    Rae
    13th Jul 2016
    8:07am
    I'm surprised at you MICK. The stereotyping of older people as computer illiterate is such a beat up.

    Who invented the www?

    Equally a nonsense is the LNP belief that superannuation and pensioners did not cause older people to vote independent.

    Well it was exactly the reason I voted independent and will support our independent into the next election.

    The young advisors straight out of unis need to get out and talk to older people once in a while instead of making it up from fairy tales in their narrow viewpoints.
    Blossom
    14th Jul 2016
    5:34pm
    There has been issues with the Paypal site not working for a few days.
    Not exactly reliable....including the bank it is connected to.
    Dancing Queen
    12th Jul 2016
    10:22am
    I'm an older Australian and would have no problem with electronic voting. After fighting the size of the Senate ballot paper and standing in the cold; it would be so much better. True Kaz; they've got three years to sort it out!
    particolor
    12th Jul 2016
    5:50pm
    That lot couldn't sort out "What's for Lunch" in 3 Years !! :-) :-)

    12th Jul 2016
    10:25am
    Until ALL bugs are worked out of the e-voting system I would trust it even less than "nimble-fingered" manual counting. Without fool-proofing, the few manual "errors" will work themselves into multiple digit figures with phoney politician polling prowess. Computer counting was used in the recent Noosa Shire election with loads of problems and a very poor result. Some candidates in ANY election wouldn't hesitate selling their mothers to get elected, much less hiring a hacker for the winning numbers.
    jackie
    12th Jul 2016
    10:35am
    I have been wanting online voting for several years. It can be done through the My Gov site. It holds our Medicare, Tax, and Centrelink records. Sure there are some oldies that don't want to learn to use technology they are scared of change, not online fraud. Let them vote by post. Online voting saves money, time, trees and is faster. We wouldn't have to wait forever for those overseas postal voters. There is nothing safe about our present voting system. You rock up and tell them who you are and that's it. No questions and no ID required. I am sure it has been abused.
    Old Geezer
    12th Jul 2016
    11:50am
    I already do a lot of online voting and have not had any trouble with it. So much easier than filling out forms and posting them. It is just so hard to find a mailbox these days and when you do it is always in a very busy area with no parking so is difficult for disabled people to post a letter.

    Online fraud does happen but it is not as bad as one is led to believe. Just think if it was a big issue would banks trust it? I don't think so.
    Gordon
    12th Jul 2016
    12:06pm
    I think you could probably have more integrity with on-line voting and there is also the cost....the 2013 election cost $193 Million. Once the electronic voting was setup, it would cost much less into the future
    buby
    12th Jul 2016
    12:35pm
    AHMMMM Jackie I can't get even get onto MYGov Site at times and when i last tried, and had to go through process of identification, they gave me somebody elses questions to answer to go to my mobile lol.
    YEH right. Again if they want us to E vote, they best get the nbn right first, then some oldies need to be helped. Or get them onto postal voting, cause yeh, just one mention of a computer to a friend of mine and didn't contact me for quiet a while lol.
    So you know really they have much to be working on besides this. LIKE our Health system, which NONE of the Pollies have been able have have running properly. All their intentions are of just going down the USA style. Which is NOT acceptable.
    Privatizing every also NOT acceptable. This they seem to feel is the answer for every and all this does is UP the prices for us. WE can't RUN to Panama, to collect any monies, to cope, like them Sneaky Pollies do.
    Give US oldies a break many of us have worked extremely hard, WE deserve a break???
    'Ps, they need a many women in there, to break down the rubbish policies, they have enabled. Bring back Reality
    jackie
    12th Jul 2016
    1:07pm
    buby.... The My Gov website does have some glitches which they will perfect. The savings from online voting can go toward our Health System. The only management skills our Pollies seem to have is to continue making cut backs on our most needy citizens and increasing the cost of living.
    Old Geezer
    12th Jul 2016
    2:10pm
    Only problem with mygov site is all those silly questions. So what do we all have to do write them all down with the answers. Great security idea.
    Anonymous
    12th Jul 2016
    4:39pm
    Gordon, NOTHING will cost less in the future. You are living in Dream Land.
    babyboomer
    12th Jul 2016
    10:39am
    So bloody unimportant next to the many many worrying things that a Liberal govt wants to do to poorer people like me. I'm so damned sick of their one sided attitude. They are MEANT to serve US the electorate.
    Old Geezer
    12th Jul 2016
    1:16pm
    I really can't see what you have to whinge about myself.
    particolor
    12th Jul 2016
    5:54pm
    babyboomer .. Saying things like "Poorer people like me" can attract some rather Strange Creatures on this Site ! :-) :-) :-) Look out !! :-)
    Anonymous
    12th Jul 2016
    6:44pm
    parti, more like just "baby". Certainly no "boomer".
    TREBOR
    12th Jul 2016
    7:13pm
    Here's a Joe Hokey-Pokey for you:-

    Poor people don't USE politics... (or roads, or homes, or anything else apparently)...
    babyboomer
    12th Jul 2016
    10:48am
    There's no prob with e-voting. I'm gonna have to learn to drive the latest push-button cars that r coming out after all. What IS a problem is the changes the Libs want to bring in to further impoverish the old suck poor & retired. This question is merely a distraction. Bread & Circusses or distractions from the REAL ISSUES is typical Pollies behaviour.
    Anonymous
    12th Jul 2016
    5:33pm
    You are saying a lot of nothing and would make a good politician yourself.
    TREBOR
    12th Jul 2016
    7:14pm
    That's what happens in the wilderness of mirrors.... phrase borrowed from James Jesus Angleton...
    FM
    12th Jul 2016
    11:03am
    Did you see the 60 Minutes program on superannuation on Sunday night? While it was obviously initiated by people who can contribute significant amounts into their super funds and by the funds that manage that money and are very unhappy about the limits on contributions proposed in the budget, it covered the issues that affect all retirees. The main ones are that annual income from super does not adequately cover living expenses for many people, especially if there are emergencies, and that the superannuation will not last to cover later years of life. It is a pity publicity like this did not occur when severe cuts were made to the incomes of people with low to average lump sums and part-pensions last year. The media and funds only responded when they were personally affected. We could say the same thing about Mr Shorten and the Labor Party. We have had to fight the changes made to the incomes of those who can least afford it by writing to politicians individually, a strategy that so far has had limited success.
    Although we do not yet know the final composition of the Senate perhaps now is the time to let representatives of the main parties know that we carried through on our threat and regretfully could not vote for them because they singled out retirees and aged care for such brutal cuts. We could also let Independent Senators know that we voted for them because we believe they will support the aged and vulnerable against attacks from the major parties. The Independents can speak up on issues loudly and at length. They are not bound by party rulings, but can only block measures in conjunction with the opposition. We know Jacqui Lambie is onside but we should thank her for her support. We should contact Bob Katter and Pauline to ask for their representation. Derryn Hinch would be a particularly good spokesman if he were onside. People can also contact Nick Xenophon with concerns about the adequacy of superannuation and the impact and short sightedness of the 2015 cuts. He usually votes with Labor as he did when he voted to cut part pensions and the super supplement for people with defined benefits superannuation. People can decide who they will contact in the major parties apart from the leaders; perhaps Arthur Sinodinos in the LNP or a local member; Barnaby or a local member in the National Party; Sam Dastyari in Labor may be more pro active than some others. It is open to suggestion but we cannot rest on our laurels just yet. There is still a lot of pressure on to raise taxes on retirees.
    I will post the most recent attack on seniors from the Grattan Institute next.
    GeorgeM
    12th Jul 2016
    12:05pm
    Missed that program, however agree with much of your analysis, especially "It is a pity publicity like this did not occur when severe cuts were made to the incomes of people with low to average lump sums and part-pensions last year. The media and funds only responded when they were personally affected.".
    The Opinion on the Article above is correct - the diversion to eVoting as an issue / trying to paint older workers as objectors, instead of trying to understand why both parties failed to get voter's support is indicative why people should not have voted for them - unfortunately, many still have.
    Does YLC send opinions of this forum to political parties, as individual efforts have clearly not worked?
    LiveItUp
    13th Jul 2016
    7:57am
    I watched it on Now9 (yes us seniors are quite tech savy now) and it was biases towards the high incomes earners and reported on same that will work to they drop no matter their bank balance.

    What did annoy me was the woman spokesperson from the company that designed the new super rules. She was right no matter what.

    Super has enough fees and expenses already and the complexity of the budget measures will only add to these. We need a simplier super system not a more complex one.

    I do agree however the current super system is too generous where some people get hundreds of thousands tax free annually frommtheir super fund. I was talking to a fellow whonwas complaining that he had to take a minimum of $250,000 per year out so his fund didn't pay tax. He was so wealthy that he didn't know what to do with the money.

    Yes I know this is way off topic. I wonder how many people were actually spooked by these super changes enough to change their vote.
    Rae
    13th Jul 2016
    8:34am
    I wasn't spooked but I certainly was annoyed enough to change my vote. I don't like being betrayed and that was what the 2015 changes were as far as I can see. A betrayal of hard working and saving Australians.

    You don't have to spend every last dollar you get every fortnight.

    Some of us have worked that out and delay gratification and save, We are now being penalised by having long term promises of some government assistance in old age stolen.

    Personally I'm tired of childminding rebates, tax concessions, first home buyers grants , fit young immigrants on TV every time a police raid goes down instead of being at work doing what they were allowed here to do i.e. work and pay taxes not live on welfare spitting out kids.

    And yes Bonny the gap between the very rich and the very poor is back to levels last seen in 1929.
    The politicians are mostly wealthy bankers, lawyers etc who have no idea of ordinary life on low incomes.
    World Banks are insolvent and it will end in tears I expect.

    We need better leaders to represent us but I doubt we will get them any time soon.
    Pendrey
    12th Jul 2016
    11:04am
    To say that there are more pressing issues to be dealt with is no argument at all. There are always other issues. Electronic voting would provide cheaper, faster processing. To suggest that old folk could not handle computer input is an insult.
    FM
    12th Jul 2016
    11:10am
    This article demonstrates appalling wedge politics. It is an attempt by wealthy middle aged to older businesspeople, for whom Daley and this journalist are spokespeople, to con younger people into believing that retirees are very wealthy and have them demand that retirees be taxed heavily, that their homes by taxed heavily and be mortgaged to pay for any pension people may get.
    Daley has received tens of thousands of dollars from an Government Funded Institute to repeatedly produce these Fascist attacks on older Australians. This journalist happily publishes his nonsense. It saves her thinking up something to write. The question is why does the SMH publish it. Is there cash for comment?

    Youth to foot bill for baby boomer budget incompetency
    Date June 30, 2016 Jessica Irvine Sydney Morning Herald
    If you think this election campaign has been boring, you haven't been paying attention.
    Australia's major political parties have revealed themselves as complicit in an unprecedented act of generational theft.
    There is now a bipartisan agreement by the major parties to accept budget deficits as far as the eye can see. Back when the Labor Party first took the budget into deficit, they were at least attempting to hit a surplus. The Liberal Party, too, used to pledge to fix the budget, even though they haven't. The budget today is in as bad shape as when it took over from Labor.
    Picture tween taking money from wallet. "So what?" you may ask. Borrowing rates are historically low.
    But eventually the books should balance, and when they do, they will do so on the shoulders of future generations who will pay higher taxes than otherwise.
    We hear a lot of whinging from young people about a "war on youth" and their contempt for the easy ride the baby boomer generation seem to have enjoyed through life with free education, affordable housing, generous family benefits and super tax breaks. Meanwhile, university fees climb, house prices soar and the Newstart allowance goes nowhere.
    Of course, it is a feature of youth to feel hard done by by your parents.
    So are young people today really getting ripped off? Is it getting worse? And is it any worse than what happened to our parents when they were young?
    "The answer is yes, yes and yes," says John Daley, the head of the Grattan Institute.
    "It's been a long time since policy has favoured the young, rather than the old. By contrast, we can point to dozens of decisions which have favoured older voters: a series of changes to the age pension over and above average weekly earnings; superannuation in general, which has just been the most massive gift to older generations imaginable, primarily the wealthy ones; the capital gains tax discount, which only works for people who own assets, so it's been terrific for them."
    Daley adds the little commented upon fact that Australians aged over 65 also enjoy a higher tax-free threshold than younger Australians, thanks to the Senior Australians Tax Offset, for no apparent policy reason - just simple age discrimination. "Old people just don't have to pay as much tax as young people," says Daley. "All these things are manifestly unsustainable."
    He has done the numbers, and found households aged under 65 contribute an average of about $4000 to $5000 each year to government coffers – ie, what they chip in as tax, minus the benefits they take out.
    Households aged over 65, by contrast, are a net drain on the system to the tune of about $22,000 at the start of the mining boom, rising to a whopping $32,000 six years later in 2010.
    That's an enormous and growing drain on the budget if those households continue to draw down at that rate every year until they die.
    But isn't it true that young people will inevitably grow old themselves, and take their rightful place on the taxpayer gravy train?
    "If young people think that, then they should adjust their expectations," warns Daley.
    It is becoming clear that the budget largesse shown towards older Australians over the past decade represents a one-off boost to the hip pockets of one generation of Australians that can neither be sustained, nor repeated again.
    Essentially, the Howard government took the proceeds of the biggest mining boom in our history and funnelled it almost exclusively into the pockets of older Australians. A boom predicated entirely on extracting value from the resources owned by all Australians, past and future, was spent entirely on the present generation of adults.
    Whichever party wins government this weekend will face deficits totalling $85 billion across the budget's four-year horizon. Gross government debt will top $600 billion in 2020.
    Of course, going into debt is fine, as long as you use the money to invest in assets which grow in value over time. Human minds are a good example, because good investments in education increase our ability to be productive. Investing in the health of a population also expands its productive capacity. As do investments in urban infrastructure like roads, trains and public spaces, which make our cities more efficient and liveable.
    Right, so, is that what we're doing with our debt?
    A bit. But mostly no. The budget is in deficit because we're committed to spending billions of dollars each year on the age pension, family benefits for the well to do, tax concessions on super and housing, and assistance to industries which will be dead by the time young people come to get a job.
    Our budget is in the red to fund the spending of today, not to invest in the future.
    "Budget deficits are in effect a tax on younger households", reminds Daley, who estimates every $40 billion deficit – about the norm for the past seven years – forces households aged 25 to 34 to pay an extra $10,000 in tax over their working lives.
    It is increasingly evident that the budget largesse heaped upon older Australians over the past decade has stretched the intergenerational compact to breaking point.
    No young person can realistically expect to enjoy the same spoils being enjoyed today by the baby boomer generation.
    Some will, of course, inherit their wealth. Many others will not be so lucky, deepening inequality in our society.
    And every young person will end up paying higher taxes because of the political parties' decision at this election to abandon the task of budget repair.
    Young people should be angry. Much more needs to be done to rein in tax breaks for super and housing and restore budget balance. Daley wants legislation that binds governments to producing a surplus in the four-year horizon of the budget.
    It could be a small, but important, step towards restoring some much needed fairness to the present intergenerationally corrupt system of budgeting.
    Young people are angry. It's time to get even.

    Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/comment/youth-to-foot-bill-for-baby-boomer-budget-incompetency-20160630-gpvf26.html#ixzz4DKVlSveD
    TREBOR
    12th Jul 2016
    11:21am
    As someone said - the most ferocious wedge and disunity politics in play on all sides - that's one clear reason we should never vote for the current lot.

    They've been splitting us against one another ever since the salad days of heady, wine-fueled dark back room feminism, when men were deemed beasts who kept women down etc, and thus the cry for women's equality and jobs and such became diverted by self-interested government into an avenue to attack men and split our society in twain. Kinda reminds you of Sherman's march through Georgia, dun'it?

    Since then it's been a perpetual round of playing one off against another, and a high level of violence has been introduced into the equations, particularly in the way that 'relationship' or 'family' (to quote Rose Battey) violence is approached.

    Now it's young against old, and young men particularly against older men (a good cure for longevity for some young men, let me tell you - you don't get this old without learning a few things, and 67 is nothing to me when I want to move fast)...

    Seriously - we need to find a safe place for our politicians of the past forty years - say a space station where they receive their rations once a year - but whichever way we go - we have little to no choice but to rid ourselves of them and start again - and while we're at it - we should be doing the same with 'judges' and 'magistrates' and their like. It took us years to get a police force approaching integrity and honesty in the main - now for those who promoted that entrenched corruption through turning a blind eye to falsehoods and perjury and absurd 'evidence'.
    Old Geezer
    12th Jul 2016
    11:58am
    If you are a young couple paying taxes and full whack for everything and working most of the day to provide for your family with nothing left at the end of the week then I can see why they want pensions reigned in.
    TREBOR
    12th Jul 2016
    12:30pm
    None so blind as they who refuse to see, OG - this mythical young couple without their fast cars, MacMansions, fancy TVs and offshore trips annually are welcome to our world any time.

    EVERYBODY pays taxes - stop confusing income tax with taxation.... let the young ones pay as we paid all our lives - THEN they may have earned the right to complain.

    And as for 'journalists' these days - don't make me laugh....
    Old Geezer
    12th Jul 2016
    1:20pm
    Nothing mythical about that young couple I know lots of them like that. No fancy cars, mcmansions, overseas trips for them. Whereas for pensioners that is a different story. 70% of people on cruise ships are pensioners who make a nuisance of themselves with their walkers and gophers.
    TREBOR
    12th Jul 2016
    4:11pm
    Umm - pensioners earned their way over 50-60 years of going at it? The young have to earn their way as well.... and blaming the older generations for the current malaise of the West, which is exclusively government and business wrought, is a total fallacy.

    Not hard, is it? You begrudge old Granny a once-in-a-lifetime cruise?

    Damn your eyes, Sir!
    LiveItUp
    13th Jul 2016
    8:06am
    Unfortunately the cookie jar is now empty so if pensioners earned it over 50-60 years then where is it? I agree with OG the pension is welfare paid for out of revenue. I can also understand why are young people are so annoyed with the pensioners getting hand outs and they are paying for it whilst they struggle to make ends meet.

    Talking about old grannies i caught a bus awhile back and as I was walking down the isle one fell out of her seat in front of me. So I grabbed her and put her back in her seat. She just laughed and her daughter said that why buses should have seatbelts to keep old grannies from falling out of their seats.
    Rae
    13th Jul 2016
    8:46am
    I know where it is Bonny.

    The Cayman Islands, Harbour mansions around the world, The bond market in particular etc.

    Corporations are borrowing it and losing it on a daily basis.

    The question is how we get it back.

    Yields from 2% and falling are not going to do much for growth.
    Wages aren't rising and there is no unions now to force rises out of the wealthy.

    So more $300 bottles of wine with dinner and porsche purchases will occur I'm afraid. Until it all tips over.
    Sundays
    12th Jul 2016
    11:10am
    It's a good idea, but the security issues would need sorting out and there is a cost to getting that right. Money should be spent on existing systems eg Medicare which is very old first. Yes there are other priorities. No they haven't listened. George Brandis on QandA last night said they would put forward the proposed changes to super in the current format! Pure arrogance.
    Rae
    13th Jul 2016
    8:49am
    Yes I heard the LNP denying superannuation changes had anything to do with the change in voting patterns.

    And that arrogance will do them in.

    If they do get it wrong then the next election may see them in the wilderness for a very long time indeed.
    TREBOR
    12th Jul 2016
    11:11am
    I've been vaguely following a discussion online about electronic voting, and discussed it with a few volunteers at voting points - most such are old and some don't even have a computer. There ya go, Big Brother - all out rebellious internet ISPs in one basket.... once you vote via your computer, its location number is added and you are no longer anonymous.

    I think I'll pass... one of the hallmarks of our voting system is anonymity, and I think that a secret ballot is far safer than a list that any wrong-minded individual(s) can get their hands on.

    NO!
    Coachman on the box
    12th Jul 2016
    11:34am
    Just get a VPN, Trebor.
    Old Geezer
    12th Jul 2016
    11:54am
    I can't see why anyone would not have a VPN with all the monitoring that is going on now with ISPs. I see it as them watching what is going on behind closed doors.
    Rae
    13th Jul 2016
    8:53am
    Why wouldn't you vote at a polling station using their system with an anonomous pin given out randomly to allow only one vote.

    The elderly could still use paper until tech savy populations are all that is left.
    Rosret
    12th Jul 2016
    11:12am
    I would love electronic voting. However I must say election day is a windfall for small businesses and school fetes who have the entire town turn out on that day.
    Security wise I have heard of many votes "go missing" on road delivery to the counting centre. I believe that e-voting would actually be more accurate and convenient if the right security checks were put in place. It would stop the multiple voting at different polling venues and the voting on behalf of someone they know who won't get to the polling due to ill health or dementia etc. The only negative would be if the dominant member of the family was overseeing "the vote" and it may seem as though we have returned to the era before the suffragettes. I would happy to go to an electronic polling booth to vote. They could actually inform you if you had made an invalid vote or quickly give you a summary of the parties ideology, even images of the party members, displayed information in any language, text to voice or enlarged font for the visually impaired, or allow you to amend your vote if you have made an error. Think of the millions of sheets of polling booth paper political advertisements Australia would save. I don't understand why it hasn't been done. Mind you we wouldn't have had the fun waiting for all those people to finalise the counts.
    jackie
    12th Jul 2016
    1:14pm
    Rosret....Maybe the Government would have money left over to give to the schools or the schools could run their sausage and wine sizzles to celebrate the winning party.
    Coachman on the box
    12th Jul 2016
    11:31am
    Bollocks. Evoting's a great idea. The system we have at the moment doesn't work when hospital patients, military on deployment and just plain old running out of ballot papers denies so many suffrage. And stop portraying older people as fearful doddering farts. We've been around for a while so we know a lot, seen a lot of idiocy going on around us and are prepared to call it like it is. Stereotypes are so last century.

    12th Jul 2016
    11:32am
    E-voting cannot be guaranteed security so it should not be introduced. The Pentagon has a very sophisticated computer system with a number of stages of firewall protection yet it has been hacked. They knew it had been hacked because there is a checking system. Banks do get hacked and credit card usage has been hacked and they too have a solid firewall protection. They knew they had been hacked because customers checked their accounts. If an E-voting system is hacked, who will be able to confirm that something is wrong? Hackers won't need to dump thousands of votes into the system, just a few hundred in marginal seats will alter a result without triggering an anomaly. So, we had to wait 8 days, that's 0.73% of the term of a Federal government, hardly anything to be concerned about.
    Coachman on the box
    12th Jul 2016
    11:42am
    You should know by now, Old Man, that nothing in this life is guaranteed except death.
    Old Geezer
    12th Jul 2016
    11:44am
    Nothing is more insecure than the current system where I can vote as many times as I can find polling booths. No id so they don't really know who you are or even if you are voting for yourself. I personally have voted for others in the past at different polling booths because they forgot and couldn't make it. How much of this really goes on?

    Voting through mygov site would be a lot more secure than what is happening now.
    Anonymous
    12th Jul 2016
    12:01pm
    Yes Old Geezer, the watchcry used to be "Vote early, vote often!". I agree that we should all have an ID to vote and it can't be too hard. I recall getting a sort of ID card prior to a state election which helped the markers at the polling booth, a simple name, address and electorate.
    KSS
    12th Jul 2016
    12:31pm
    And taxes Coachman on the box!!:-)
    Coachman on the box
    12th Jul 2016
    1:12pm
    Not if you bank in the Cayman Islands, KSS.
    jackie
    12th Jul 2016
    1:16pm
    Old Man....present voting has no guarantees either and is much more expensive to run.
    Old Geezer
    12th Jul 2016
    11:39am
    Current voting system belongs in the stone age. You don't have to show ID so you can vote as many times as you wish. At least electronically you can only vote once. No running out of ballot papers and no queues. Definitely a win win.

    I can't see why you can't vote at home from your own computer.

    We do all our bank electronically, submit our tax returns electronically, receive all our bills electronically etc. It actually annoys me now to get a letter in the post.

    If as a person in mysenior years I can work a computer then I can't see why others can't also. It aint that difficult. Even my mother well into her 90s is computer literate.
    TREBOR
    12th Jul 2016
    4:15pm
    I make a point of showing ID - your confession of criminal behaviour is dangerous to your health and your freedom of movement.

    Why should any person who doesn't wish to own or operate a computer do so just to satisfy some idea that they 'need' to do so to vote etc? I live in (another) rural area now, and there are countless old people who don't own or want a computer.

    Choice-Mobile, son - that's what it's all about!@
    Old Geezer
    12th Jul 2016
    4:47pm
    Well you will just have to move into the 21st century and accept change like anyone else. If you don't want to use a computer to vote just don't vote and pay the fine. It is as simple as that.

    If an Old geezer like me can do it anyone can.

    How do you get on at a supermarket? I doubt if you could just leave a list and come back it would all be packed in a box for you to pick up. Since you don't want to use a computer you can't even take advantage of the modern equivalent called online shopping.

    There is nothing wrong with helping friends out in their times of need. Many people vote for others now as it is just too difficult to use the postal voting system is you are disabled. Even with electronic voting people will do the same and get others to do it for them.

    Stop being such a saint and help others where you can.
    TREBOR
    12th Jul 2016
    7:15pm
    I take it you don't understand the concept of choice?
    Micko
    12th Jul 2016
    11:42am
    I agree that there are far bigger issues to tackle. E-Security is a big problem throughout the world. Let's get issues like the NBN sort first. I'm also surprised that more emphasis isn't given to solar power, given the very high cost of electricity. Electronic voting is way down on my priority list.
    Old Geezer
    12th Jul 2016
    11:52am
    E-security is not a big problem. If it was why would banks use it? The media just over do it. Do you personally know anyone that has been effected by it? I don't.
    Kactus
    12th Jul 2016
    11:53am
    Hmmm-
    I wonder if voting records would come under the heading of metadata or should that be meGadata?

    List of agencies applying for metadata access without warrant released by Government.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-01-18/government-releases-list-of-agencies-applying-to-access-metadata/7095836
    Old Geezer
    12th Jul 2016
    11:55am
    I have a VPN so that my metadata is not monitored.
    TREBOR
    12th Jul 2016
    4:17pm
    Ya reckon? The monitors OWN the VPNs so as to more easily sort out the dissidents....

    Check my CV - 'media monitor' figures there along with front-line security at airports etc.....

    Gullible is as gullible does, my old Ma said down in Green Bow
    4b2
    12th Jul 2016
    12:12pm
    Bring it on. Can't come soon enough. Us older voters use on line banking, myGov sites, and many other web based sites which now have excellent protection.

    There will always be nay-sayers and bed wetters not to mention the Privacy concerns. Some will say the Government and other hackers will have access to my private information.

    However taking all of these concerns into consideration bring it on.
    John from Perth
    12th Jul 2016
    12:13pm
    If you can negotiate the Oh my God! site. Sorry, meant MyGov site you can do anything on line.
    TREBOR
    12th Jul 2016
    4:19pm
    Great site until you're in a no mobile coverage spot.....
    Needy not Greedy
    12th Jul 2016
    12:14pm
    If we are going electronic let's include an electric chair as well and use it to put all the mongrels that lie their way into government only to reneg on promises in it, televise it Saturday night after the lotto draw and before the footy would be a good time. The one draw back is the price of electricity here in WA I guess, nah hangon we will fry Barnett first, problem solved.
    Old Geezer
    12th Jul 2016
    12:21pm
    So you have yourself never told a lie!
    HarrysOpinion
    12th Jul 2016
    12:47pm
    It's better if all politicians were subject to a psychopath and sociopath qualification tests before being allowed by AEC to become candidates for state, federal and council elections. Now that would an innovative thing to do!
    Old Geezer
    12th Jul 2016
    2:08pm
    Extend that to all voters and you wouldn't have many votes to count.
    TREBOR
    12th Jul 2016
    4:20pm
    I could present my DVA shrink certificate of mental health..... but what would a shrink know anyway?
    Scrivener
    12th Jul 2016
    12:19pm
    Turnbull says to his disciples, "OK lads and lasses of the Coalition, take two breaths and lets get right down top business. What interests you most? Self-interest. Ah! I knew you were all properly qualified for the job."
    Alex
    12th Jul 2016
    12:22pm
    Nice post Scrivener
    Alex
    12th Jul 2016
    12:21pm
    Thanks for the posts FM. It is utterly depressing to find this level of attack persists. I can only read a small amount of articles like this at one time. The Business lobby is absolutely determined to get tax levels down for big business and high income earners and force seniors to pay for the cuts. Tax levels have never been so low. Most of us remember that tax levels were 40%, 50% and 60%. Stealing from present retirees is also stealing from the youth they pretend to represent. Most of them will have no retirement. The politicians are trying to raise the age of retirement to 70, the oldest in the world, and only those with high incomes during their working lives will have near adequate Super. Most younger people know this and do not support these attacks. Tony Shepherd, John Daley and whatever lazy journalist they can find that needs a story pretend to speak in their name.

    I saw the 60 minutes program. It was good. It pointed out that short changing retirees now will set the basis for short changing younger workers when they reach retirement, especially those in average to lower paid jobs.
    TREBOR
    12th Jul 2016
    4:23pm
    Then why the Shaitan did the Australian voting public vote for these twerps who are intent on robbing every generation?.... or did they?
    Rae
    13th Jul 2016
    9:02am
    Yes and when they do finally take billions out of the economy they will start screaming about lost sales and consumer confidence being down.

    The business lobby is never happy. They have destroyed job security, wages and unions and are still unsatisfied.

    Even slavery wouldn't suit them as they'd have to provide food and shelter.
    wheels
    12th Jul 2016
    12:31pm
    I'm an older Australian. So, we do tax online. I don't have a problem. But if a pencil is better then at least make me identify myself at the booth. I can't think of another thing in my life that's so antiquated ! Maybe it suits them to have something to fiddle !
    HarrysOpinion
    12th Jul 2016
    12:35pm
    "The amount of attacks over the internet is insane. In an instant someone could compromise 10,000 computers"
    - eh,dah...so using ATM's is not safe then, is it?
    -or using internet banking is not safe?

    Suppose there are 7,000 polling locations around Australia for traditional voting, couldn't they innovate electronic voting booths similar to ATM's. Why does it have to be Internet transmission? What about Intranet transmission or a separate dedicated transmission that can not be hacked? Has any one in AEC done a cost study?
    - As for the elderly, perhaps those over 85 could be made exempt from voting, after all if they in a nursing home how mentally fit are they to vote anyway?
    Wstaton
    12th Jul 2016
    3:04pm
    Being in a nursing home does not emmediately make them mentally unfit. Most causes are because they are physically unfit.

    Some people!
    TREBOR
    12th Jul 2016
    4:24pm
    Some would have Soylent Green on the menu....
    KSS
    12th Jul 2016
    12:41pm
    Given that the delay is caused by postal and absentee votes, why not make those e-voting only and provide access points for those with no access to computers (yes there are still some) at places such as the local library, shopping centre etc. Then leave the pencil and paper way for the rest. That way there is no delay in counting the absentee votes, schools and community clubs do not miss out on the tri-annual fund raiser sausage sizzle and a result would be possible in 24-48 hours.
    TREBOR
    12th Jul 2016
    4:28pm
    Not a bad idea... most of these 'tradies' and such who can't make it to a polling booth have computers etc...

    (Downe at Ye Olde Nursing Home)...

    "Now then, Mrs Oldontop, here's the tablet for your vote.. I've saved you the trouble of working out your own and pre-selected those who will benefit nursing homes with funding as first choices.. good for us both, yes?"{ (smiley emoticon implied)...
    Old Geezer
    12th Jul 2016
    5:02pm
    Most people I know in nursing homes now have their own tablets. Those computer games are great for the oldies to pass the time and helps keep their brain healthy. They probably know their way around their tablets better than most people a lot younger. If they get stuck well the grandkids are more than happy to teach them.

    You might be in for a big surprise with Mrs Oldontop. A tablet is one of the first things they seem to want after they go into nursing homes now.

    One old lady in a nursing home wanted to use Facebook to communicate with her grandkids. The nursing home had it barred in their network. So her grandkids showed her how to bypassed the network block on Facebook. Before long they were all bypassing it so the nursing home took off the network block on Facebook.

    So don't underestimate the oldies in nursing homes.
    Wstaton
    12th Jul 2016
    5:32pm
    Why the heck would a nursing home want to stop inmates accessing Facebook?
    TREBOR
    12th Jul 2016
    7:17pm
    Petty or Backyard Fascism knows many faces..... beware of freaks bearing grift.....
    mykaat
    12th Jul 2016
    12:49pm
    I would love e-voting. But NOT from my home computer. I agree with the issue of maintaining anonamous voting, and voting from home would take that away. Set up a bank of computers at the polls. Same deal, get marked off, and then instead of a yard of paper, a computer set up to take your vote.
    jackie
    12th Jul 2016
    1:19pm
    mykaat....Polling booths with supplied wifi and tablets for those that don't own their own could be made available.
    Old Geezer
    12th Jul 2016
    1:21pm
    We have libraries that people can use so no need for polling booths.
    Anonymous
    12th Jul 2016
    2:10pm
    Yes that would work well
    TREBOR
    12th Jul 2016
    4:29pm
    Why not the police station... find someone you can trust...
    KB
    13th Jul 2016
    2:21pm
    E voting should be accessible to those of us who are disabled and cannot get out to vote. Census is coming soon so the option of doing this online will save on paper work I
    Thumper88
    12th Jul 2016
    12:56pm
    E-Voting is inevitable, so why not start now and in three years time it is ready to go. We have a government that repeatedly tells us that this country is broke. here is one way of saving Millions, and then they can start to crack down on this country hemorrhaging money to off shore banks and accountants. As an employee I receive my pay slip that informs me of any and all deductions made before I receive my consumable pay. Guess what heads the list (TAX) we pay our taxes before we receive our consumable money. With Technology today there is no reason why the tax office of Australia could not receive taxes from companies and corporations as soon as they receive payment for goods and services. At the end of year present their proof for deductions, this would collect a considerable sum of the money PM's and economists are yelling about going off shore but doing nothing. This initiative would save us Billions each year, then the country could afford free medical and education for all of its' citizens.
    Rae
    13th Jul 2016
    9:06am
    We would have to put an end to negative gearing. THese companies lend themselves money and claim the interest of tax as they siphon profits back into the lending company.

    A transaction tax is a good idea but scares business and banks witless.

    It could be very small indeed and raise big amounts.
    shirboy
    12th Jul 2016
    12:59pm
    I say bring on e-voting & I am ready for the 2016 CENSUS on the 9th August to use my computer for that too.
    Canman
    12th Jul 2016
    1:20pm
    Ah no there goes the sausage sizzle.
    Old Geezer
    12th Jul 2016
    1:22pm
    At least people will be healthier with no snag sizzle.
    Anonymous
    12th Jul 2016
    2:07pm
    No snag what are the pensioners going to do for a freebie.
    Old Geezer
    12th Jul 2016
    2:11pm
    I always thought they were the most expensive snags I ever saw so where is the pensioner freebie?
    oldtimer
    12th Jul 2016
    1:24pm
    Mr Chester "saying it has the potential to alienate older voters".... “For some of our younger voters, there’s no doubt we would prefer that,... A lot of older voters would be cynical about and would be uncomfortable with it,” Mr Chester told ABC radio.

    What an arrogant, ignorant and insulting statement!

    Does this man really believe the stereotypical nonsense that all mature people spend their days in the corner dribbling over their walking frames?

    Many of we octogenarians wrote our own programmes using BASIC programming language MORE THAN 35 YEARS AGO, when he was still in school.

    Someone should explain to him that computers are not new and were not invented by "some of our younger voters" but by people who are now in their nineties.

    I have often heard the expression "we get the politicians we deserve'. Do we really deserve politicians who are so far out of touch with mature people?

    I suggest "A lot of older voters would be cynical about and would be uncomfortable with" their 'out of touch' representative in parliament.
    Kactus
    12th Jul 2016
    2:06pm
    Great post, but you neglected to mention if you think there is any way that they can make electronic voting
    invulnerable to corruption.
    I would be interested to hear your views.
    Jezemeg8
    12th Jul 2016
    2:13pm
    Really??? Older people such as myself are distrustful of e-voting??? Really MP's need to come into the current century and understand that many Senior's have embraced technology as a means to remain as independent as possible when disability encroaches on their abilities.

    Postal voting for me (and others) is impractical, one has to make a special trip to a mail box to lodge it, and hope that it is collected and not 'lost' as so much mail is these days. Lodging an e-vote would make the whole process so much easier for me and for many others.

    They can make online banking safe, they can make online billing safe, why then is e-voting considered to be a privacy issue???? SORT IT OUT AND GIVE THE "OLDIES" SOME CREDIT PLEASE!!!!
    bob
    12th Jul 2016
    2:30pm
    some of these comments seem to be for another article and not on E-voting.I personally think it is great but let us wait till Murdoch is past tense, as some one who interferes with the reporting of the election campaigns and has people who can hack the royal family,s phones would have no compunction with altering voting figures so that his chosen people win
    Nomad51
    12th Jul 2016
    3:08pm
    In principle I have no problem with e-voting BUT I am concerned about the likelihood of hacking or abuse. It was very easy for one political party to send out thousands of bogus "Medicare" text messages; why stop there? That event was enough to demonstrate that some will go to any measures. I wonder if the AEC would suspect anything if for instance more votes were received than the physical population?
    Vee
    12th Jul 2016
    3:13pm
    I have to agree with what's the priority! The economy, health system, jobs, education and some politicians are talking about e-voting!!! Who elected him/her? Have they learnt nothing! Honestly what calibra of politicians do we have running for office! Maybe we need less educated pollies and more with some good old fashion sense! Just a thought!
    Enquiries190
    12th Jul 2016
    3:17pm
    Hmmm. 645,000+ informal votes in the 2016 election, or about 5.00% of votes cast.

    With electorates being decide in some cases by a few hundred votes, wouldn't it be nice if everyone who votes had a valid vote which counted??

    Would E-voting require only valid inputs of data?? If yes, should we feel sorry for those who wish to register a protest vote by voting informal or draw phallic symbols on their ballot paper??

    Save trees and go electronic.
    Old Geezer
    12th Jul 2016
    3:31pm
    Everyone has the right to vote informal so the system would have to allow for informal votes. In the US it asks if you wish to proceed if your vote is informal.
    Sceptic
    12th Jul 2016
    4:01pm
    Yes Enquiries, lets design a system to suit the loonies.
    Rae
    13th Jul 2016
    5:43pm
    That would depend. During My Masters in Social Science I had to design surveys.

    I wondered why the EITHER/OR and the use of posters with a very small blue either /or was used.

    At least 5% of the population would stuff that up.
    oldtimer
    12th Jul 2016
    3:29pm
    Hi Kactus.

    It is true that genius exists within the criminal community and however secure the system can be made, superior brains exist who will be able to breach the system. Consequently, I doubt if any system could be guaranteed to be invulnerable.

    However, millions of dollars are continually traded between banks all over the world. The betting community uses systems which are updated by changing the betting odds with every ball that is bowled, or every try that is scored.

    My credit card is scanned in Woolies and Coles or Bunnings and my account is reduced by that amount before I can get the purchases home. Billions of purchases are made every day with credit cards.

    Automatic Telling Machines dispense billions of dollars in every currency in the world by a simple interactive system where you enter a few digits and walk away with hundreds of dollars.

    Compared to the above examples, electronic voting by using an interactive system of registering your vote by entering a digit in a box, would require an elementary system. The system could contain many safeguards to prevent corruption. It would certainly be less vulnerable than the current system where the traditional ‘vote early and vote often’ community is said to exist.
    Wstaton
    12th Jul 2016
    5:39pm
    Let's face it the probably most secure systems in the world have been hacked. (Eg military sites) There is a lot of gain in this. Nasty countries would enjoy creating havoc in voting outcomes by doing this.
    Kactus
    12th Jul 2016
    7:18pm
    Thanks for the reply.
    Maybe we could use our Medicare number as ID.
    fedup
    12th Jul 2016
    4:02pm
    What the hell is a VPN??
    Sceptic
    12th Jul 2016
    4:07pm
    Virtual Private Network.
    Wstaton
    12th Jul 2016
    5:40pm
    I wondered how long it would take before someone asked.
    Sceptic
    12th Jul 2016
    4:07pm
    What I am distrustful of is a site that supports a particular agenda. This site supports and promotes Get Up. Now Get Up has emerged from the closet (not that it was a secret to any but the wilfully blind), and campaigned against the coalition in this election. Will this site now declare that it is an ALP/Greens front, or divorce themselves from supporting Get Up?
    Coachman on the box
    12th Jul 2016
    5:17pm
    What the hell is wrong with campaigning against that ragtag herd of lying, cheating, self-serving, plutocratic bastards. I'm all for what Get Up achieved in Tasmania.
    Old Geezer
    12th Jul 2016
    5:18pm
    I too are over Getup.
    Wstaton
    12th Jul 2016
    5:43pm
    Where does it say this site is for getup? The only support I have seen is from com mentors and they are quite entitled to give support if they wish. This is a free society.
    mangomick
    12th Jul 2016
    10:08pm
    Well Sceptic ,which one do you mean ALP or Greens??? You can hardly mean there is some sort of an alliance between the ALP and Greens when the ALP were advising voters in certain seats to give their preferences to the LNP.
    Sceptic
    13th Jul 2016
    2:43pm
    Sorry Wstation, this site regularly promotes GetUp. i am Sorry that you have missed the times that it has been done. Of course the submitters can support who they want and voice their support for whoever they like, but the site, as well as regularly supporting GetUp campaigns, presents the discussion subjects and gives opinions on the subject being presented. If the presenters approach that from a particular political angle, it is only right, to my mind, that they declare their political position.
    Shalshooli
    12th Jul 2016
    4:22pm
    Why not have postal voting earlier. Seems these votes caused a delay. Postal service is terrible. If they had to be in earlier they could start counting quicker. Just a thought.
    Shalshooli
    12th Jul 2016
    4:22pm
    Why not have postal voting earlier. Seems these votes caused a delay. Postal service is terrible. If they had to be in earlier they could start counting quicker. Just a thought.
    Thterbl
    12th Jul 2016
    4:24pm
    Older Australians who have retired from the Information Technology industry, had experience as polling officials, have travelled overseas and own a "device" will know that cyber polling as practised by many community-wide organisations is actually more secure, quicker, less stressful and more accurate. It will happen ! Look at what is happening to banking !
    Dukki
    12th Jul 2016
    5:05pm
    I believe that as Australia is a compulsory voting country how will they police the voting. It may work when voting is not compulsart. What do others think ?
    Old Geezer
    12th Jul 2016
    5:15pm
    How do they police it now? You can vote as many times as you like and even vote for others by having their names crossed off. Voting electronically could not be any worse.
    Truck
    12th Jul 2016
    5:46pm
    The problem with e-voting is that the result can be altered, either by bad data or deliberate hacking. Studies in the US and other places have proved how vulnerable e-voting is to this sort of attack and without paper ballots how would the result be checked? Even if our political parties were above trying to steal the election (and I don't think they are), foreign powers might find it in their interests to decide who governs our country. Look at the cyber war going on between China and the U.S., those sort of attacks are happening all the time and e-voting would be a gift to a would be attacker. There is no such thing as a totally secure system and if e-voting was introduced how could the electorate ever be sure that the government we have is the one for which we voted?
    john
    12th Jul 2016
    5:54pm
    both my wife and I are in our seventies and have been why we do not have electronic voting for years. it amazes me the waste of paper and other resources at every election albeit local, state or federal. and the long drawn out wait and arguments about results are disgraceful when results can be available the next day.
    Jurassicgeek
    12th Jul 2016
    6:42pm
    even less for Qld ..I got no probs with evoting but get it right and secure....
    oldtimer
    12th Jul 2016
    7:33pm
    Kactus has got the answer to preventing multiple electronic voting.

    He said "Maybe we could use our Medicare number as ID".
    LiveItUp
    12th Jul 2016
    10:48pm
    Oh dear I think that would be just causing trouble after the Australia Card debate a few years back.

    It seems tbat if you change the address on your drivers licence they also change your address on the electoral roll. So they might already have that in mind as an ID.
    Briar
    12th Jul 2016
    8:42pm
    So why can't we choose how to vote? Online or in person?
    Sceptic
    13th Jul 2016
    2:48pm
    I do not think that voting online necessarily means casting a vote on your PC or phone. All it needs is to be done in the polling booths. You would still register and have your name crossed off, but the booths are equipped for an electronic entry of your vote. It would not be so hard to have that secure
    mangomick
    12th Jul 2016
    9:53pm
    I'll vote electronically when I can claim the cost of my computer on my tax.If they bring in electronic voting they should make it voluntary .I've been in and seen my Local Member on one occasion and she was able to get some resolve with a Government Department but in general how many people are really effected any differently by who gets in. You are going to get screwed no matter who is in so just let those who feel strongly about Politics go and vote and leave the disinterested alone. Now the election is over I feel so unloved. My phone is no longer ringing and the post man doesn't stop any more.
    LiveItUp
    12th Jul 2016
    10:45pm
    You don't claim the cost of your computer and internet off tax. I certainly do together with electricity it uses and the desk it sits on. You can even claim your morning tea if you are a self funded retiree as you are self employed as as such you have to provide yoursekf with morning tea.

    My phone is still ringing wanting to know who I voted for etc. So I answer first question no I don't vote and they hang up. They never give up it seems.

    I'm not effected by who gets in so why worry about it.

    Post is still full of same old rubbish as before the election campaign so I just keep recycle bin handy.
    Gammer
    13th Jul 2016
    1:43am
    I agree with paricolor - just add the voting link to the MyGov site.... I postal vote anyway being a 'silent' voter and it seems that it is these votes that add to the delay in final count figures.
    Gammer
    13th Jul 2016
    1:44am
    Sorry, particolor, typo in your name...
    Johnny
    13th Jul 2016
    7:54am
    What is this world coming to? Instant gratification plus! Who cares if we have to wait a month for an elecction result! We have a caretaker Government working well and the nation has just kept ticking along. Just like my local council (Geelong) after it was sacked a few months ago. Yes I am an oled Australian and very wary of technolgy. It does fail sometimes.
    SuziJ
    13th Jul 2016
    8:07am
    Last year, we had an election in NSW - I think it was a local govt one, and we had the chance to either vote early, postal, on the day, or e-vote. I took the e-vote option and was very satisfied with the process.

    When people are saying that the elderly - or over 60s aren't embracing the technological changes, all I can say is that my father-in-law, at the age of 75 went to the local TAFE and learnt how to use a computer. He is now 85, and still enjoying keeping up with the family via technology. Who says that the elderly aren't embracing change?

    Using your MyGov account to vote would be so much easier, as you already have been identified by the departments which use the service, so why doesn't the AEC come on board and then when voting time comes around, you use your MyGov account to vote. The other beauty with this would be that if you moved address, ALL of your linked accounts would be updated at the same time without having to resort to doing one department at at time.

    Just my thoughts, everyone is entitled to their opinion.
    GrayComputing
    13th Jul 2016
    9:59am
    Unfortunately the "voting machines" used mainly in the USA at polling stations have been shown to prone to major flaws and poor security and most computer scientist and computer security experts say they are fatally flawed.
    As to e-voting well the same can of worms exists.
    If we cannot stop ID theft and the loss of millions of credit card accounts is a daily event who can possibly belief or trust in an e-voting system?
    50 years in the computer industry has made me proud that we have a totally manual voting system
    Pollyanna
    13th Jul 2016
    10:07am
    Get your head out of your rear end. Most older Australians do not like on line banking. It is so risky to have on line voting as hackers can easily add more votes. I am sorry but I will not even use Pay Pal as that it very dangerous. To make voting easier and more realistic, start with ONE VOTE ONE VALUE. STOP PREFERENTIAL VOTING. It is a farce and checking the votes would be much easier. Wake up Australia.
    mangomick
    13th Jul 2016
    10:34am
    I used to love going to the Circus. I loved seeing the clowns. It only came once a year. I figure if I was patient enough to wait 365 days to see what tricks the next lot of circus clowns looked like then waiting eight days isn't that long to wait to see what tricks the next lot of clowns in Parliament are going to do.
    Dallanhk
    13th Jul 2016
    10:40am
    Totally agree ........ NBN is just a pipe dream which will be out of date before we get it.
    mac_paddy
    13th Jul 2016
    11:14am
    MPs do not speak for this 67 year old. I am not scared of technology and use it every day. Banking, bill paying and so on. It is typical of MPs to find reasons not to do things, that might explain why our roads and public transport are clogged and our internet services are 3rd world. Instead of MPs saying how poor old people are scared of technology, why don't they promote the services provided to older people to learn about and use technology.
    mangomick
    13th Jul 2016
    4:16pm
    I'm not surprised the MPs don't speak for you. They wouldn't know whether to use a Scottish accent or an Irish one....:-)
    TheDon
    13th Jul 2016
    8:04pm
    E-voting: the bigger picture

    Well congratulations for an overall balanced and healthy commentary mostly reflecting the view that it is a good idea yet rightly concerned about the security implications.
    A key point made by many was that it is inevitable; the only question being when not if.
    However, I believe there is a much bigger opportunity available by extending e-voting so that it will lead to real democracy through much better consultation by coercing politicians to act upon public opinion rather than the current position which is that they believe they know better than we do. Granted, this will (and should) take several generations to be effective and relies on us removing compulsory voting at least for part of the process.

    We should start with 'social issues' and later we can move to other areas such as health, super, education etc. I find it arrogant in the extreme that any politician or party believes they have the right to make a conscience vote on my behalf on the gay marriage issue. Are any of them qualified ethicists? This also applies to other current social issues such as the right to die with dignity, any changes to the legislation on abortion, the role of the pension as a safety net and a whole host of other societal issues we currently face. These are questions that are far too important to be left to politicians of any persuasion especially when the party can force their politicians to follow the party line.

    As readers would know, recently in Scotland, they held a referendum about leaving the UK and in Ireland about gay marriage. In the run up, if you went into a pub in either country the topic of conversation was NOT soccer - it was about the referendum. They became very much engaged in that debate. What a massive victory for democracy this seems to me. Not only were the vast majority engaged but they felt empowered and part of the process. Having said that, we should also remember that such processes carry with them the responsibility of taking such matters seriously. The regret shown in the Brexit by non-shows and others who changed their minds is testament to that.

    So how do we move forward? The idea is simple but the timescale is long, probably several generations. We extend e-voting to include forums where in the first instance social issues can be discussed and aired. By all means allow politicians to put their views (after all they are members of the public and have every right to express their own opinion too) but let's hear public opinion as well as experts in that domain and let's hear from people who have direct experience of that issue too. In other words let's get engaged in the running of our country by giving the public a voice and a vote on specific issues. And if that allows people like us who have more time and more life experience to draw on to make a bigger contribution (and by the by demonstrate that we are not confused and technophobic), then so much the better. Now wouldn't such a beginning be a legacy to leave our grand-children?
    oldtimer
    14th Jul 2016
    10:41am
    The Don is right.

    The democratic system must be seen to be faulty when 49.9 % of the population has to live with a system which is diametrically opposite to their points of view.

    Don said, "extending e-voting so that it will lead to real democracy through much better consultation by coercing politicians to act upon public opinion rather than the current position."

    Citizens referendum by e-voting may be the answer. The current system of an oligarchy of politicians is anachronistic. With the current technology available we should be able to improve the flawed system.
    oldtimer
    14th Jul 2016
    2:33pm
    The current system is flawed because when I vote for a left or right wing party the inference is that I agree with that party’s policy on every issue. This applies when I have no idea what policies are going to arise during the term of a parliament. Nothing could be further from the truth.

    I may agree with their policy on some issues but the opposing party policy on other issues. By voting for a party, I relinquish my right to an opinion on major issues which does not always agree with the selected party.

    Furthermore, the leader can change during the life of the parliament as happened when Turnbull replaced Abbott. Turnbull made decisions which would not have been made by Abbott, but thousands of people had voted for the Abbott party. They may not have voted for a Turnbull party.

    I suggest the replacement of Abbott with Turnbull resulted in the swing against the right wing in the recent election.

    As suggested by The Don, “extend e-voting to include forums where in the first instance social issues can be discussed and aired” seems to be on the right track.
    mangomick
    14th Jul 2016
    2:56pm
    I'd suggest that the swing against the LNP may have been partly because Turnbull ousted Abbott but more so because many saw Turnbull more of a moderate right rather than hard right like Abbott.When they saw that he was nothing more than a puppet being manipulated by the Ultra conservatives in the Liberals they took their vote elsewhere. Abbott was never popular with voters.
    TheDon
    14th Jul 2016
    8:41pm
    Mangomick, I think you are spot on with your assessment of Malcolm Turnbull being at the mercy of the ultra right as being a significant factor. It raises the question of what deals with the ultra right were made when he ousted Tony Abbott. Personally, I think Turnbull didn’t have a lot of choice but to cut a deal given the circumstances at that time and I certainly hope he can now work towards a more centrist position – unlikely I’ll admit given he’s got his work cut out with a hung parliament. Further, I’m sure you’ve noted that this week nothing has changed as he negotiated behind closed doors with the Nationals with no statement to the public concerning what deals were struck. This raises the question of what level of democracy we actually live in when deals such as these are somehow acceptable without transparency and further how we can move towards insisting that at least the outcome of ALL such negotiations are made public.
    Since you mentioned the ‘ultra conservatives’ in your reply, I wonder if I can quickly share my alternative to the ‘two sides of politics’ model we seem addicted to (or at least what the main two parties would like us to think of as the only way to look at the ‘binary political divide’). It’s by no means a perfect model but in my view gives a deeper insight underpinning many of the material issues discussed across this forum in the last year by demonstrating why the behaviour of both parties appears to be just downright fickle at times. So instead of a continuous line from extreme left to extreme right, we have a circle. Just to the left of north we have Labor and just to the right we have the LNP. Now moving from north to south in both directions along the circle we become either more left or more right in our political viewpoint until we get to south. So at south we have the ultra left just to our left and the ultra right just to our right. What I like about this model is that it lumps the ultra left and right very close together, which in my opinion is where they deserve to be located. This is because if we move up a level from thinking about the specific issues (such as cutting company tax, changes to superannuation, cuts to middle income earners and above) we see they actually have a lot in common. For example, they are essentially faceless, they seek to manipulate the political process for their own ends, they hide behind the face of a more centrist party because they know their politics are simply unacceptable to the majority of the population and since they payroll significant funds into their respective parties they expect much (arguably too much)back in return. So Mangomick, using the above model and given your very valid observation that perhaps some voters ‘moved their vote elsewhere’, I wonder how valuable in retrospect their decision really was – from the frying pan of the ultra right to the fire of the ultra left? However, I do feel if we can address this faceless skulking, we can start to move towards a more honest, open, transparent, accountable and therefore much healthier and effective political environment. Or am I asking way way too much?
    mangomick
    14th Jul 2016
    9:10pm
    Call me a dreamer if you wish but after listening to many varied disenchanted voters during this election I see in the not too distant future many more good local independents of the Nick Xenophon mold stealing votes away from the just left and right of North and eventually we may end up with a True North. One that truly represents the communities who put them there. Perhaps Michael Kroger paid the Greens a massive compliment when he stated that the Greens were no longer the "nut cases they used to be.
    Blossom
    14th Jul 2016
    5:32pm
    e-voting is NOT secret ballot
    If a computer crashes vote will not be recorded and people will be fined.....probably no different to running out of voting forms in quite a lot of polling booths including some in SA.
    It is your personal choice whether or not you disclose your email address. Also not everybody has a computer. Sometimes households have ONE email address for a FEW people NOT just one.
    oldtimer
    15th Jul 2016
    5:12am
    No system is perfect, but e-voting can be secret (to the general public), if each person is identified not by their name but by their Medicare number and the programme could guarantee only one vote per unique Medicare number. No more 'vote early and often'.

    If a computer crashes, no vote is recorded so voters could go to another computer to record their vote.

    All public libraries have computers for public use.
    Blossom
    14th Jul 2016
    5:36pm
    It will not work if a network is down. e.g. how many times has Telstra been down this year so far. Several times in SA.
    Gee Whiz
    16th Jul 2016
    12:10pm
    Electronic voting can never be safe. It is open to abuse and hacking by even the most basic of operators with a small amount of computer knowledge.

    The big boys would have no trouble hacking the Electrol


    Join YOURLifeChoices, it’s free

    • Receive our daily enewsletter
    • Enter competitions
    • Comment on articles