 |
| Source: www.cbc.ca |
Given this, it is somewhat surprising that
voting over the Internet, sometimes called i-voting and occasionally included
in the broader discussion of e-voting, hasn't already been more widely
implemented in more countries around the world. To further this discussion,
Senior Political Correspondent Jason Farrell of the UK's Sky News recently engaged
in
an online webchat via Google Hangouts with three guests on the merits and
challenges of casting a ballot via the web. The full replay of the 22 minute
debate has been uploaded to YouTube.
In that discussion, WebRoots Democracy
founder Areeq Chowdhury points out that it's almost a common sense point to
modernize the democracy in the United Kingdom and bring it up to date by
offering an online option for voting in elections. The Internet, as mentioned
above, already infiltrates such a wide range of daily activities and to retain
the archaic pen-and-paper method of casting a ballot as the primary method of
voting feels incredibly outdated.
Indeed, just as Sir Richard Branson feels
that the
Internet is the future of voting, all of the guests on the program also
support its adoption, but not without some hesitations. There is the risk of
security threats for “hacked” votes that would compromise the integrity and
legitimacy of election results. Chowdhury agrees that there are risks and there
will be flaws. He also agrees that the lack of a paper trail to verify votes
cast can also be worrisome, but he feels that the bigger risk at play is the
risk of losing even more voters. The drop in voter turnout has been alarming
and it needs to be address. The electorate needs to be more engaged with the
political process and taking the vote online, along with other tools related to
the election, can help to keep the modern political system relevant for voters
both young and old.
To this end, Emma Mulqueeny of the
Speaker's Commission on Digital Democracy feels that should an i-voting system
be implemented in the United Kingdom, it makes more sense to look at the things
that people are already engaging with online. She uses the example of social
media, like Facebook, as a possible route for developing an online voting
system rather than spending excessive amounts of money to develop a brand new
system from scratch that could just as easily be riddled with flaws and
problems.
In response to critics and naysayers who
fear an online voting system that can be hacked by criminals, Mulqueeny says it
is actually far easier to trace a digital footprint online, looking through
servers and IP addresses, than it is to trace any ill-doing and tampering
through paper ballots. It is harder to be completely anonymous on the Internet.
Chowdhury agrees that everything has flaws and nothing is 100% secure, but
people are still willing to utilize services – online and offline – that are
equally as insecure as an online voting system. The issue is whether or not you
can secure it to an adequate level.
Perhaps one of the most telling
perspectives came from National Youth Council in Estonia member Marju Tamp as
Estonia has been a leader in the I-voting revolution for a
number of years. She says the security has been “flawless” and the
Internet-based voting has been a very positive experience overall.
Surprisingly, the older generation is actually accepting i-voting more happily
than youth in her country.
Internet voting offers a
compelling possibility in the United Kingdom and throughout the rest of the
democratic world. Watch the full 22-minute Stand Up Debate from Sky News on YouTube.
