paper-ballots.jpg

Listen Up! Bring back paper ballots | Commentary

Last week I was tempted to write about my views related to internet voting. I refrained however because the municipal election was still in full flight, and I did not want to discourage anyone from casting their ballot. 

But the municipal elections are over now. The people have spoken and that is the only poll that counts.  In Huntsville, 36.2% of eligible voters either made their choices through the internet or by telephone. This was slightly above the average turnout for municipal voting across Ontario, where about half voted by paper ballot and the other half on the internet or by telephone. The number of voters in other Muskoka municipalities was also pretty close to this average. 

At the outset, let me be clear that this article is not about challenging the legitimacy of any municipal election in Muskoka or anywhere else for that matter. Obviously, everyone who voted did not all get their choices for mayor or council elected. But, when all is said and done, in Huntsville we have elected good and capable people who have the best interests of the municipality at heart, and I am sure other towns and townships in Muskoka have done the same. That is the democratic way. 

Those that refrain from voting because they have a low regard for all politicians are only hurting themselves and endangering the democratic process. A part of one comment to my editorial last week, particularly caught my attention. “Voters are likely to get dishonest, secretive, unethical, unrepresentative, and wasteful government, no matter who they vote for, and as a result, no one should be surprised to see voter turnout at such a low level.”

Wow, the cynicism here is palpable! Let’s not give them a chance. Let’s assume they are all a bunch of crooks out only for themselves. Let’s not seek out those who we believe would do the best job because there aren’t any. Surely, that is how to achieve a self-fulfilling prophecy. 

My own view is that the vast majority of people who stand for public office do so for the right reasons, often sacrificing family time, personal privacy, often income, and at times risking their own safety. Of course, we will not always agree with them, and we shouldn’t. That is why it is important to vote. But to write people off as incompetent or dishonest, simply because they seek or achieve public office, is simply wrong.

On the other end of the scale, those who allege corruption or malfeasance in elections with absolutely nothing to back it up are just sore losers if not, at times, also dangerous. They believe that elections are only legitimate if things go their way. We all know how that worked out in the United States.

The right to vote is at the core of any legitimate democracy and, in my view, those that shirk that responsibility weaken and indeed threaten the democratic process. You eliminate people who do not belong in public office by voting, not by sticking your head in the sand.

It is important, however, that the sanctity of voting is fully protected and that everyone has confidence in it. People have a right to know that their vote is counted, that their vote is secret, and that only those that are entitled to vote actually do so. I continue to believe that internet voting fails to meet that vitally important test.

A major argument for internet voting is that it is easy and convenient, and it will encourage a higher voter turnout. Certainly, it is not hard for those who use the internet, and for some, it may be more convenient. However, it clearly has not had an effect on voter turnout. Provincial elections in Ontario and federal elections are both conducted with paper ballots and in both instances, voter turnout is more than twice than at the municipal level. If internet voting is so effective, it is fair to question why both provincial and federal officials insist on a paper ballot.

Voting by paper ballot in person or by mail requires proof of residency (you have to return your ballot with proof of residency when voting by mail) and therefore proof that you are eligible to vote. Voting by internet does not require proof of current residency and therefore can easily allow people who should not be voting to vote. Voting lists are not always current, some people may have died or moved and still receive a pin in the mail. And while it is illegal for their votes to be cast by others, it is possible to do and difficult to detect.

Further, during the internet and telephone voting period officials are able to determine how many people have voted each day as well as who has voted. If they can do that, it is fair to ask if someone can also access the system to determine for whom people have voted.

In addition, traditional safeguards available with paper ballots are seriously diminished. There is little or no role for scrutineers to play, and no ability to recount the ballots in the event of a very close race.  The final results are determined by machines and the people who control them. 

In summary, I believe that internet voting is riddled with potential problems including security, privacy, voter identity, and the inability of candidates to have scrutiny of the process.

 Paper ballots cast in person or by mail are, in my view, far more prone to accuracy and fairness. The Province of Ontario allows local municipalities to choose the manner in which they conduct elections. Again in my view, they need to change that and make a paper ballot, either by mail or in person, mandatory for all jurisdictions.

If it is the right thing to do for federal and provincial elections, surely it is also the right thing to do for municipal voting.

Hugh Mackenzie

Hugh Mackenzie has held elected office as a trustee on the Muskoka Board of Education, a Huntsville councillor, a District councillor, and mayor of Huntsville. He has also served as chairman of the District of Muskoka and as chief of staff to former premier of Ontario, Frank Miller.

Hugh has also served on a number of provincial, federal and local boards, including chair of the Ontario Health Disciplines Board, vice-chair of the Ontario Family Health Network, vice-chair of the Ontario Election Finance Commission, and board member of Roy Thomson Hall, the National Theatre School of Canada, and the Anglican Church of Canada. Locally, he has served as president of the Huntsville Rotary Club, chair of Huntsville District Memorial Hospital, chair of the Huntsville Hospital Foundation, president of Huntsville Festival of the Arts, and board member of Community Living Huntsville.

In business, Hugh Mackenzie has a background in radio and newspaper publishing. He was also a founding partner and CEO of Enterprise Canada, a national public affairs and strategic communications firm established in 1986.

Currently, Hugh is president of C3 Digital Media Inc., the parent company of Doppler Online, and he enjoys writing commentary for Huntsville Doppler.

Don’t miss out on Doppler!

Sign up here to receive our email digest with links to our most recent stories.
Local news in your inbox so you don’t miss anything!

Click here to support local news

Join the discussion:

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments are moderated. Please ensure you include both your first and last name and abide by our community guidelines. Submissions that do not include the commenter's full name or that do not abide by our community guidelines will not be published.

11 Comments

  1. Doug Beiers says:

    I did not vote locally as I am not familiar enough with the candidates to make an informed choice. However I did vote provincially and was very pleased that paper ballots were issued when I attended. I was shocked when they took my paper ballot and fed it into a computer! I mentioned this on an online forum and someone stated that it was a Dominion Computer. When I asked how they knew this, the person responded that the word Dominion was printed clearly on top of the computer. I was too unsettled at the time to take a close look at the computer they fed my paper ballot into, but if true WTH is going on? Anyone else have an insight as the Dominion machines have a bad rep around the world, esp in the US elections.

  2. BJ BOLTAUZER says:

    I suggest that the Proportional Representation system, such as practiced in many countries around the world, but notably in Denmark, would entice more people to come out and vote, as everybody would be able to expect to be represented whatever the outcome. The recent event in Denmark shows that PR results in more fruitful cooperation among the political parties instead of senseless confrontation and animosity. Please read an excerpt from the article published by the Canadian advocates for PR “Fair Vote Canada”:
    Denmark’s election is a powerful example of how proportional representation transforms democracy
    Denmark had an election yesterday.

    The contrast to Canada’s last election couldn’t be starker. It isn’t just in the numbers―it’s in the politics.
    In Canada, with first-past-the-post, the pursuit of power drives the agenda.
    Minority governments are tenuous. They last until one party believes they can seize all the power with 39% of the vote. They want to gain complete control of Parliament.

    Every one of Canada’s minority governments has lasted two years or less.
    In Denmark, by contrast, elections occur predictably every 3 to 4 years.
    With proportional representation, no single party has been handed all the power in Denmark since 1909. The last time Denmark had a government that lasted only two years was back in 1979.
    Parties in Denmark have learned to work together―and the voters expect them to do so.

  3. Doug Austin says:

    Thanks Hugh,
    I believe paper voting is essential for those who don’t own a computer (or device) and over the phone may also be intimidating, maybe because of hearing loss or other personal reason.
    In some cases, family members are now forced to assist, those who need help voting, removing the ability of a secret ballot.
    Let’s make all 3 methods available so we are as inclusive as possible.

  4. John D Brown says:

    Good Article, I believe I can answer some of your questions. I am a retired information technologist and rent my services out to municipalities that run Internet Elections. As far as the electronic ballot box is concerned, that is the RO’s first concern when determining which system they will go with through public tender. They need to see the electronic ballot box in an empty state before the election starts. Then they need to see it full of ballots, the interesting part here is, it is encrypted and requires decryption to see inside of it. That means they would have to suspend the election, that may raise questions. Lastly they want to see how the results tally and ensure there isn’t any private information attached to any ballot.
    I cannot comment on your municipalities procedures for scrutiny. Ours were like this. To ensure accuracy of the system we held a mock election ensuring all candidates receive ballots. In other words an audit of the system. These results are for public scrutiny. We do the entire election process to test the system fully.
    On the day the voting period starts there is a zeroization of the system to ensure the ballot box is empty. All Candidates/Scrutineers are invited to this process to ensure the system is at zero and everyone is at a level playing field. At the end of the election on Election night, the election gets suspended by a DRO who is ususally in charge of the Voter Help Centre. This person advises the Returning Officer and the Auditor that all voting has ceased in the voting centre. There is a set time frame for someone on the internet voting if they got in before 8 pm. If they haven’t finished voting by say 8:20 they are kicked out of the system. A quick tally is done on the Voters list to balance with the number of votes cast in the Voting system. The Auditor and the RO/Clerk put in decryption codes to decrypt and count the ballot box. This is a session that candidates and scrutineers can attend. Then the results are published “unofficially” to the public in the same room where the decryption was done. Also on Social Media and websites.
    I won’t go into the issues with the Voters List as this is a different paper tiger to maintain, but I will say it is all our responsibility to maintain the correct data on our properties to ensure an accurate voters list is maintained. MPAC runs a site for this called VoterLookup.ca.
    Hope some of this makes you more comfortable with Internet Voting, There is a lot done behind the scenes that municipalities should be informing their electorate about to keep the trust in one of our sacred systems.

  5. Susan Godfrey says:

    Britt Stevens; sorry to call you out but I think you represent a certain “feeling” that some possess of late. Let me say in no uncertain terms, it is incumbent, as citizens of our society, to vote regardless of our feelings. We are all working members of this place we hold in our world. I hear your somewhat jaded opinion of our times and it makes me very sad. We can only work with the information we are given about each candidate and, trust, yes trust, that that person will follow through in spite of the work and time it takes. Elected officials let us down regularly but if we don’t exercise our right to vote what do we have really? It’s called fascism.

  6. Tom Spivak says:

    I agree totally with you Hugh, both options should be available. I know for a fact that some individuals said to me they simply did not like the internet option and preferred going to a polling place.
    As well, there are a greater amount of people than most officials expect that do not have internet, know how to use it, or even havec cell phones. They are automatically excluded from the process. Perhaps a fine for not voting?
    Australia I believe uses that practice and it has been effective. When only 36% of the populace votes that’s not democracy.

  7. Peter Alexander and Renate Alexander says:

    I agree wholeheartedly with your views, and believe that if you don’t vote you have no right to complain. I voted via internet for the first time and felt something was missing. There was something symbolic about going to a polling station and putting one’s mark on a ballot. It felt meaningful.

  8. Britt Stevens says:

    Hugh, I think its ok if people do not vote. To vote just for the sake of voting without doing your homework is a wasted ballot in my opinion. Understanding all the candidate’s platforms in an election is a lot of homework! It is also really tough to get honest un bias opinions and answers when evaluating candidates not only from the candidates themselves but also from the public in general. Politics can be so polarizing. At the provincial & federal level I have often asked myself, does it really matter who gets in? Will it affect my life at all? It will just be “unwound” anyway by the opposition down the road.

    I am by no means encouraging people not to vote but I get if politics is not your thing. Voter turnout might be the highest ever right now as those most interested are retired baby boomers.

  9. Henk Rietveld says:

    Hugh, I very often agree wholeheartedly with your point of view. Always well considered, and well thought out.
    But, on this issue, I have to disagree. Yes, there were glitches, and no doubt some will harp on them, but by and large it went smoothly. My partner and I are both physically challenged, and, for us, the online voting option was excellent. We got our PIN in the mail, were able to vote from the comfort of our living room, and were very happy with the way the process went. Ok, bumps and grinds, but it has to be the way of the future…and
    I embrace it.😊

  10. Jim Boyes says:

    Hugh,
    As always you have considered the all the aspects of the situation and made wise observations.
    I concur with most.
    Internet and phone voting is probably acceptable within reasonable margins.
    My suggestion would be that every municipality should be required to have at least one traditional poling place where voters can cast their vote in person in the traditional format. His should include at least one advance poll day and one day corresponding to the established voting day.
    That would give those who for whatever reason prefer to vote in person an opportunity to vote within their comfort zone.
    Jim Boyes

  11. Debi Davis says:

    For me, internet, mail or telephone voting takes the special feeling away from Election Day. There is something to be said for taking the time to go to the polls to make your mark. Often friends and neighbours spend a bit of time catching up. It’s hard to get that feeling of being part of a community in front of no one but the computer screen.

    The other thing that is missing is paper back up proof. I am afraid I have seen too many horrible hacking stories to give me confidence in a system that cannot layout a paper trail.

    Call me an old lady, so be it.