The electronic voting machines are being scrapped because they don’t work.
They don’t do their job.
The results can’t be verified, the machines are vulnerable to hacking and the system doesn’t adequately reflect the single transferable vote system operated in this country.
Therefore the machines and software are not fit for purpose.
They don’t work.
So here’s my question. Did NEDAP fulfil its design brief or did it not?
It’s a very simple question.
If NEDAP did everything set out in the brief, yet produced a voting system that didn’t do what it was supposed to do, then the brief was fatally defective. Who drew up this brief, how was it checked and who signed off on it?
Conversely, if NEDAP did not meet the criteria set out in the design brief, why was it paid? Once the commission of investigation discovered that NEDAP’s system was a crock of shit, why didn’t the government immediately institute legal proceedings to recover the money that had been obtained by NEDAP fraudulently?
The implications of this question are very worrying.
Knowing that NEDAP had failed to deliver on its contract, and had produced a system that would inevitably be scrapped, did this government take a conscious decision not to issue proceedings?
Did this government decide instead to write off €50 million so as to avoid the embarrassment of admitting it had made a mistake?
Previously on Bock: