Re: Random Reflections column - 100 Years Later

I read with interest your column this past week and thought I'd pass on my comments.

In response to your question, as to why poll-by-poll results cannot be released immediately to the press as you requested from me on election day, here is what I believe. I do not know the reasons why poll-by-poll results were released the next day 100 years ago. I suspect they didn't have a national body such as Elections Canada handling elections as they do now. I also suspect the problems they have encountered over the years because they've released these figures early, led to the current rules. The reason the general public is not allowed during the counting of the ballots is to maintain security and enable counting of the ballots to continue in an organized manner. Only duly sworn election officials and authorized candidate representatives are allowed to ensure the integrity of the process.

Although I may not be privy to all the reasons why Returning Officers are not supposed to release poll-bypoll details to the media or public the day after an election, there is a very important reason why the candidates get the poll-by-poll results first. They are the ones who usually seek a judicial recount. As such, they are granted the first opportunity to examine the details after the validation of results and determine whether they have grounds for seeking legal adjudication. As Returning Officers, we cannot legally declare the winner on the Writ until a specified period of time passes to allow any candidate time to address any result concerns with the judiciary. If the judiciary powers agree to a recount, all ballot boxes, details etc. are locked up until a judiciary team is formed and the recount takes place.

As to the poll sites in your article, you have to remember times were much different 100 years ago. Most of the communities you spoke of were local business focal points for a rural society that didn't have the means to travel long distances. Many communities were likely larger than they are today. Officials in those days also didn't have to adhere to the same guidelines for site selection as we do today. Having physically evaluated all the communities in your article over the past few years, very few have a facility that meets today's standards for establishing a poll. You also have to understand that Elections Canada does not have the authority to use any facility they would like as a polling station. These facilities are leased from landlords at a preset fee on the basis of availability or the landlord's whim, after an election is called. Returning Officers maintain approximately twice as many sites that have been prechecked for a variety of criteria as they would normally need during an election. We know from experience that many of our primary sites are unavailable when we call the landlords and therefore have to go to alternate locations. In some cases, when we have no other choice but to reduce the criteria for site selection in order to secure a location that is at least convenient to most electors in an area. As most rural residents are much more mobile today than 100 years ago, having polling sites in the small rural locations isn't as necessary as it was then.

Additionally, 100 years ago, people didn't have access to voting by mail, using E.C.'s Special Ballot procedure. Hundreds of thousands of people now use this method to vote, including armed forces, incarcerated electors, hospital patients, people working away from their riding, etc. Today people in all ridings don't even have to leave their homes to vote. Special Ballot applicants still have to provide the same identification criteria via mail, as people voting at a poll. Once approved they'll receive a ballot that they can fill out in the comfort of their own home and mail it back to our returning office in a pre-stamped envelope. The only criteria they have to meet, is that the ballot must arrive back at the returning office on or before election day in order for it to count.

With this past election being held on a Tuesday after a long weekend, we encountered more problems than usual in filling our polling site needs. We were not able to secure many of our primary poll locations for a variety of reasons. The sites we ended up using were often our second or third choices. Many Returning Officers have also been asked to move some of their poll sites to non-school locations This is because of the new school lockdown procedures that could be invoked at any time. If a lockdown were to occur at or near a school while a poll was on-site, that could severely impact an election, especially if there were multiple polls inside. This further reduces facilities for potential poll sites.

As to the use of the Internet to cast votes, Elections Canada doesn't create the laws. We simply have to follow the rules created and passed by Parliament. However, the first obstacle that I personally can foresee are those created by the new Canada Elections Act amendments for identifying who you are and where you live. Remember, we have a Parliamentary system that says you can only vote for a candidate in the riding in which you live. During each election approximately 10% of the electors who vote have to register or make changes as to where they live before voting. If this isn't controlled, it's possible that every Electoral District's results could be challenged in a court of law.

As an individual who has over 40 years of experience working in the IT industry, I believe the Internet is NOT a secure place to be conducting an election. I certainly wouldn't allow my social insurance number to be put out there for hackers to steal and use. Even worse, what would happen if hackers rigged the election results? What type of documented proof would E.C. have for auditing purposes if vote tallies don't add up? You also have to remember, that the election process has to allow every Canadian citizen over the age of 18 the right and means to vote. What about the hundreds of thousands of seniors living in old age homes? Many people live in remote communities with no access to the Internet (or power for that matter). What would happen if there was a power blackout or your Internet provider wasn't available or became so overloaded that it couldn't handle the communications traffic? These type of incidents happen more frequently than one would think and could likely happen during an election. The outcome would be catastrophic.

There is nothing seriously wrong with the present process. It's very simple, effective and easy to use for almost all electors across our society. It's designed to allow any of our citizens to vote, regardless of their physical or mental situation. It's controlled nationally using the same rules for everyone in every riding across the country for consistency. The election results are available to all of the Canadian public via the media within a few hours of the polls closing and the candidates know quickly whether they are successful or not in their bid for election. One hundred ago, the newspapers were the only media for getting results to the general population. Television, the Internet and radio are the primary source now. For those who want specific details of poll by poll results, they are available through Elections Canada once all official results are completed.
Bill Lynch,
Returning Officer,
Dufferin-Caledon

- - o- -

Near the end of Tom Claridge's column "100 years later, it seemingly can't be done" in the Oct 16th issue, he asks "For instance, why on earth shouldn't we have the opportunity to cast ballots on the Internet?" Well here is why we should NEVER allow that.

1. The internet is inherently insecure. Although many if not the majority of people do banking online and many oth- ers purchase things online, frauds do occur...more frequently than you might think.

I work in the Information Technology industry and that is a well known "secret".

Absolutely no web site is totally secure. Now that said, I'm not advocating a reduction in trust in online banking, purchases, etc... since there is a big difference between buying something or paying a bill and exercising your most fundamental right in a free society...to Vote. All Banks and most reputable online retailers have put "reasonable" security in place, however it is not absolute.

They know that a certain amount of fraud may/will occur in their online systems and they accept that risk as part of the cost of doing business, since it is so much cheaper to provide those routine services online.

The banks have contingency funds set aside for dealing with fraud, and that is why you can call them up when something untoward shows up in your statement and they investigate and (usually) refund you. I'm not sure how a vote could be refunded!

2. There is no way to make any online transaction anonymous, particularly a "secure" one where you need to authenticate yourself (i.e. log in), which obviously would be a requirement to discern who should be allowed to vote and who shouldn't (i.e. prove you are a citizen).

Somewhere deep in the bowels of that database will be an audit timestamp and a record of your transaction (needed for recounts).

The right to cast a secret ballot is fundamental to democracy and we could never be absolutely sure that someone either involved with building/managing the system or a nefarious criminal wouldn't be able to extract that info and make use of it.

3. Even with internet security and anti-virus software, how many readers have had a virus or other nasty bug on their home computer.

I suspect even Mr. Claridge has experienced that. If voting was allowed online, then it would not be beyond the abilities of some to build a virus or spyware type tool to change your vote even as you cast it, without you even knowing.

4. With election dates publicized well in advance, folks who despise democracy could mount a so called "Denial of Service" attack on Election Day.

This type of attack, where web sites are targeted and overwhelmed by thousand if not millions of fraudulent transactions have occurred on some of the biggest and most secure sites on the internet. Since they happen outside the site itself, there is no way to completely protect a site from becoming unavailable during such an attack.

No, I believe the effort of going to a polling station and physically marking a ballot is something we simply must accept as the cost of living in a free society.

No internet voting, no voting machines (and their inherent "chads"), just a simple piece of paper you put an X on.

Many have given the ultimate sacrifice both past and present to secure our right to cast a secret vote to select those who govern us and I for one am not willing to give up the integrity of that vote for some moderate convenience.
Richard Baird
Mono

Recently, when visiting the Arctic, Mr. Stephan Dion pointed out a lone polar bear with her two cubs, saying that the polar bear population was decreasing because of global warming.

Being excellent swimmers, those lonely polar bears could have joined their buddies on another ice floe!

What Mr. Dion (and Mr. Suzuki and friends) fail to mention is the fact that the polar bear numbers have increased dramatically in Antarctica, so there is no possibility of them becoming extinct.
Elizabeth Davies
Orangeville