Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 18 May 2004
382 Mr. F. McGrath asked the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government the reason he acted without adequate protection for the taxpayer when he signed a multi-million euro contract for electronic voting machines; the reason he failed to include a routine clause in the contract that could have saved the taxpayer €50 million; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14101/04]
View answerThe contract for the supply nationally of the electronic voting machines followed a testing programme undertaken in relation to the functionality and durability of the machines, as well as their use on a pilot basis at polls in seven constituencies. I am satisfied that the contract includes appropriate provisions for the protection of customer interests. The contract sets out acceptance procedures, which include final performance testing by returning officers. Formal acceptance of the voting machines by a returning officer occurs only when the machines have been satisfactorily performance tested by the returning officer and the latter completes a certificate to that effect. The contract provides that any malfunction of the machines on delivery will be remedied by the suppliers at their expense and the warranty period on the machines extends to the end of 2007.
The Commission on Electronic Voting, in its interim report, recorded that testing carried out by experts retained by the commission confirmed that the voting machine accurately and consistently records voter preferences, including at multiple simultaneous elections. The commission's recommendations for further testing in relation to the overall system related principally to the management and counting software rather than to the voting machines. In line with the commission's recommendations, it is intended that the voting machines will be used in future polls when the further programme suggested by the commission has been completed.
