Politics
DODGY: Victorian Electoral Commission going down the Hugo Chavez road
The US Central Intelligence Agency has been monitoring the use of electronic voting systems in countries like Venezuela, Macedonia and Ukraine because of their vulnerability to vote-rigging.
It is widely believed that Venezuelan ruler Hugo Chavez resorted to massive cheating in a number of elections there.
There is concern that the Victorian Electoral Commission could be opening the door to the same kind of wrongdoing.
With the Commissioner Steve Tully refusing to provide access to electronic voter preferences data files, which has the effect of denying public review and the right to independently scrutinise elections results, concern is mounting that Victoria’s public elections are no longer open and transparent.
Errors can and have readily occurred in the use of data entry by computers in recent elections.
The VEC on 2006 destroyed computer preference data that would have allowed verification or the the correctness of the elections results. No backup and or systems were in place to safeguard and protect this information.
Steve Tully, Victoria’s Electoral Commissioner gave evidence last year to the Victorian Parliamentary Committee and when asked if he could produce copies of the preference data for the preliminary count of the 2006 Victorian Western Metropolitan Legislative Council Region Mr Tully speciously claimed that the information was no longer available as the data had been overwritten and that backup copies had not been made.
Copies of this information had been requested prior to the conduct of the election. The refusal and inability of the Chief Commissioner to make this information available casts a shadow over the integrity of Victorian elections.
The results of the election changed overnight with votes going missing in some counts and the total number of ballot papers recorded between count A and count B indicating 250 votes less in the final count and less then the number of ballot papers issued for the lower house. The outcome of the election also changed with Labor Unity member Henry Barlow losing the recount by less then 150 votes to a Greens political party candidate.
Electoral analyst Anthony van der Craats raised concern with the State Parliament over the procedures of the Victorian Electoral Commission and their refusal to provide copies of the preliminary data file for independent analysis and scrutiny.
“It is impossible to scrutinise the results of a computerised elections without access to this datafile. It is crucial that this information is published and readily available to public scrutiny. The failure of the Victorian Electoral Commission to make this information available undermines public confidence and leaves the system open to allegations of computerised fraud” Mr van der Craats said. The VEC had failed to put in place procedures to ensure that the elections results were independently verified.
Similar concerns have arisen with the 2008 Municipal elections where scrutineers were denied access to the electronic preference data file recording the election results. The Victorian Electoral Commission falsely claimed that the law prevented publication of the vote data even though copies of this data was provided for the City of Melbourne election, access to this information was not provided for other municipalities.
Mr van der Craats has express concern at the failure of the VEC to maintain an open and transparent election process and has called on the State Parliament to legislate to ensure that electronic voting in Victoria is open and transparent and that the detailed preference data files are open to public scrutiny.
Discussion
12 comments for “DODGY: Victorian Electoral Commission going down the Hugo Chavez road”
Post a comment
When the commissioner received objections to the application by People Power he stated he was seeking legal advice. That legal advice was an oral request to the state legal officers, who gave a verbal reply. The state legal officers did not receive or read the application or objections or people power replies. This is UNBELIEVABLE BUT TRUE. This is how BRUMBY RUNS VICTORIA. A first year law student could have driven holes through the application.
He (the Commissioner) registered people power knowing that it had never ending membership and copies of minutes. People power provided statements and minutes which showed that the membership ceased in May June 2005. Yet in November 2005 people power changed its rules to make it never ending memberships. Later that same night with different members attending the Board of people Power passed a resolution reinstating all members whose membership was forfieted under the old rules. This was illegal. The Commissioner is not in control. He ignored statements by people power insiders who gave evidence of scurrulous activies. This commissioner should go. He is biased against objectors. In the hearing with the electoral matters committee he stated that all members who are on the list submitted for registration are kept in confidence. DLP were told this. WRONG there is a way of getting all lists.
I know I am hopeless but should we now publish all the details of the people power application and subsequent VCAT hearing that was abandoned when he de-registerd people power? The electoral matters committee has a copy.
Stephen Mayne and Vern Hughes should be embarrassed about the changes to the mebership rules of people power.
Something like 1800 members were not invited to the meeting to change the rules. This is democracy at work.
According to the commissioner there are thousands of people out there who are in his opinion still legal members of people power.
This is all on the public record as it was presented to the State Of Victoria Parliamentary Committee. The Electoral Matters Committee.
Tried to get it investigated by the Registrar of Incorporated Associations but were told they did not have enough time or staff.
I am not the only one who is hopeless. The Electoral commission is.
The federal Electoral Commissioner is not any better. Despite many objections about people power they still registered them.
Most electronic voting isn’t secure, CIA expert says. Could the CIA be investigating Steve Tully?
Steve Tully also defamed Ray Collins when he falsely accused Mr Collins of making threats and harassment when all he was doing was raising concern at the lack of transparent in the electronic counting procedures. Ray Collins and Anthony van der Craats have been proved right with a number of people growing concerned about the lack of accountability, openness and transparency of the computerised elections.
Scrutineers at a number of Municipal elections were denied access to the electronic preference data with VEC staff claiming that the legislation prevented access to this information. When asked to substantiate the claim the VEC failed to do so.
Steve Tully in the process has undermined confidence in the electronic count, He has cut corners and refused requests for ballot papers to be preliminary sorted into primary preferences prior to the data-entry process.
The State Parliament had specifically recommended that the VEC undertake a preliminary distribution. A
recommendation that Steve Tully and VEC returning officers ignored.
The State Parliament must undertake a further review of the 2008 Municipal elections and the processes and action of the Chief Electoral Commissioner.
Last week the VEC and Steve Tully was facing questions in court over the conduct of the 2008 Municipal elections. Concern was expressed that the VEC refused to provide access to the detailed elections result denying the candidate the right to scrutinise the count and to independently verify the results.
Vern Hughes is a serial fu**er upperer.
This nerdy, happy clappy, philandering tosser has stuffed the Social Entrepreneurs Network, Social Enterprise Partnerships, Pro Populi, People Power & Centre for Civil Society.
I find it extraordinary that the VEC destroyed crucial voting record data files and that there were no backup copies made. What sort of operation are they running? It costs millions of dollars to tabulate the results of the election and there is no backup procedure?
Give the municiple elections back to the councils.
In everyones life you rise to the level of incompetence.
Has Steve risen to his?
There should be an investigation. Democracy is too important to be lost in a computer. How come when it was wiped they did not bring in computer recovery experts?
Did any of the info ever go into the computer?
This needs a royal commission
Steve Tully in his evidence given to the Parliamentary inquiry stated that the copies of the data-file was not available and that the preference data file of the original count in Western Metrolopitian Region was overwritten during the recount. By not making a copy of this data-file available for scrutiny Steve Tully and the VEC have prevented analysis the ability for scrutineers to independently review the quality and accuracy of the computerised data-entry count. In single member electorates there is no justification that warrants the computerised counting of votes. A manual process is just as quick, if not quicker and cheaper. More importantly a manual count is open and transparent where a computerised data-entry process is not.
THE CIA have rightly expressed concern about the potential of computerised electoral fraud.
In Victoria’s case I do not think there is a deliberate attempt to defraud the electoral process.
Rather then a conspiracy it is most likely a case of a stuff up and a overzealous Commissioner seeking to cover-up his mistakes by denying access to crucial information. The claims that there is no backup of the data-files and that information has not been made available are specious to say the least. If backup data does exist then Steve Tully has mislead the parliament. If it does not exist then he is just as guilty for not ensuring proper procedures where in place to protect the data-files. Either way he is clearly at fault and must be held accountable.
The parliament must review the electoral process and ensure that this information is readily available and that the results of public elections and the computerised counting of votes is open and transparent.
Ukraine does not have a computerised counting system. The ballot papers are manually counted and the results are then tabulated by the central electoral authority. However there is real concern that if countries such as Ukraine and other nations adopt a computerised electoral process the results of the elections could be subject to fraud without the establishment of proper procedures and processes. Similar allegations exist in the USA where electronic voting is widely being deployed
The CIA needs to fix its own counties problems with electronic voting first before it can criticize other nations. Likewise Australia needs to also address its own issues. The key to combating electoral fraud is to maintain an open and transparent system. Cover-ups and denial of access to information provides the potential for fraud and corruption.
Why would Brumby want to fix the system? As long as it serves its purpose and the government can fix the results with a nod and a wink and agreements made behind closed doors. “We will look the other way attitude” accuracy , openness and accountability are secondary in the scheme of things. Ten to one the Brumby government will not act to correct the mistakes and flaws in Steve Tully’s tally. Corruption has already set in and will only fester the longer the rot is allowed to stay. Its been 2.5 years since the 2006 State Election and Brumby’s government have failed to make any changes to date. John Cain was a reformer Brumby is not.
why can’t the results be re-put into a computer. Did the paper copies also get wiped?
Should be simple for the VEC to reproduce the data. Would only take a week.
Does the VEC own a bank of paper shredders.