In the future, elections could be held and we the electors could perform our duty of voting by logging on and voting on-line.
I have no great issue with this as a concept. However, if this was to be a reality, it could be taken a few extra steps.
Just imagine, the main point of our elected representative is to represent our views within the greater parliament. If we could vote on-line, we may not need to be represented by someone, we could do it all ourselves. Maybe, via an official government forum style website, important issues of the day or week or whatever could be posted, those interested could have a say, after a period of time a vote taken. Hay presto, you have a result.
Now that is Outsourcing.

I am afraid that I consider "thebull" to be far too innocent when he suggests we use electronic voting at elections. Many years ago the electoral office looked at this and decided it would be too easy to fake the result. The use of paper ballots, individually initialled by the issuing officer, and supervised by scrutineers from all candidates, has resulted in over 120 years of elections where there have been no sustained allegations of electoral fraud. The paper ballots are physically preserved until the next election, and are available for scrutiny at any time. Events in the USA in 2000, together with reports that the 1960 US election was faked by Mayor Daley in Chicago, makes the image of electronic voting very dubious. With its only advantage being speed of results, (which the media would oppose as it would destroy the horserace event on election night), it would result in no benefit in our system where 10 days is allowed for votes to come in from all over the world. Speed of result comes a poor second to integrity.

One electoral reform we do need is to have a compulsory additional candidate at each election - vacant. In addition for voting for the nominated candidates, each elector could vote to have the seat left vacant. "Vacant" would have preference votes, just as now, and if "vacant" wins the seat would not be filled. "Vacant" would not be able to resign before the next election, so the seat would remain vacant until then.

Another reform that would save money and help voters would be to have registered voters. These voters could register to be a voter for a particular party, and they would not need to attend the polling booth as their vote would be automaticaly recorded. They could change their registration at any time up to the close of polling at an election. The same thing could be done for referendums ( I would love to become a registerd "NO" voter.) Political parties would be prohibited from pesterng registered voters with election material.

It was my understanding that in the ACT electronic voting has been used in 2001 and again in 2004, the first of its kind to be used for parliamentary elections in Australia. The system uses a barcode to authenticate votes. Although, no votes are taken or transmitted over a public Internet. At electronic polling places, voters are given a choice of voting electronically or on paper.

I understand that the ACT is not exactly the same as NSW or Qld re population however, the technology would be the same.

Time Magazine’s Person of the Year for 2006 was “You” http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.html, a recognition that new communication tools are giving individuals a much more influential voice in all kinds of activities, not just politics.

The ability of a broader range of people to express their opinions on political issues is establishing a clear trend towards direct democracy http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=17

However steps towards more formal mechanisms for direct democracy (of the kind you are describing, bull) need to be undertaken very carefully, in order to protect from

* voter fraud and/or electoral manipulation
* “tyranny of the majority” – majorities riding roughshod over minorities
* short-term-ism – voters sacrificing long-term prudence for short-term gain
* knee-jerk reactions – voters deciding issues based on temporary circumstances

Of course all of the above can and do occur in conventional parliamentary democracies. However parliaments have developed systems to minimise the risk of them occurring. Similar systems are not yet in place for the kind of direct, electronic democracy you have in mind.

Thebull presents a good democratic system in theory but it is a theory that is dependent on rose coloured glasses. I would like to make the point that the people voting on issues are the same people have sustained both political parties. I strongly believe in democracy but I admit that Australian voters have more than proved that they are not intellectually capable of assessing over simplistic party policies (delivered to the voter as a series of slogans) let alone capable of assessing complex issues.

Lets face it most people are empty headed, we in the west are currently under attack from terrorists who justify their acts on the basis of reductionist parody. Many people just can’t ‘get’ evolution and offer magic as more likely. Climate change has worsened through neglect to the issue based on hay seed reaction to a globe that one can not see over the horizon.

Another reason why thebull’s theory is rose coloured dependent is that good information is swamped by garbage. Between the media and the internet it is almost a waste of energy trying to seek the facts on any given issue. Most information is stealth infomercials, biased politicising and political Trojan horses. Where information is available, credible, peer reviewed it is often in professional language outside of the understanding of the layman and often takes detective work to seek out the information. Most people would be too lazy to be fully informed. Government would become a full time job for every Australian.

However

Thebull presents a good democratic system in theory and it is unlikely to be worst than what we have at the present time. Thebulls system may have prevented the loss of democracy, the theocratic creep and the loss of human rights in this country. With policy voting there would also be a danger for persecution but that is more of a danger under the present system as we have witnessed with IR laws and abortion counselling