Leader: A vote for e-voting

London Mayor Ken Livingstone has given his backing to the idea of e-voting, suggesting the next mayoral elections in 2008 may include virtual polling via phone, internet, digital booths and interactive television.

It's a development which is being touted as the antidote to voter apathy. It is also seen as a boon to disabled or housebound voters or those who work hours which might make voting difficult. And all those are factors which make e-voting a choice we have to make.

But it is not going to be without its problems, such as the obvious concerns about security and the integrity of such vital data.

Similarly the concerns about the validity of data and the opportunity for abuse of the system will have to be calmed considerably before it sits well with everybody.

While the last US presidential election proved the current systems in place are not without difficulties - if understatement will stretch to cover the wrong candidate being named President as 'a difficulty' - the first Stateside dalliances with e-voting have not been without their own teething problems. Most notable perhaps is the fact Orange County elections recorded a turnout of more than 100 per cent of the electorate.

More votes than voters is definitely a considerable teething problem.

But this is a technology which has to be embraced and the scepticism which surrounds all voting means we should be building in a fairly high tolerance to criticism threshold.

By 2008 the technology and the means of identity verification should be robust enough to guarantee a fairly flawless e-voting system.

We have to hope the knowledge and the implementation process also doesn't let it down.

Because underpinning any e-voting rollout is the obvious fact it is a government IT project - and enough has been written in the past about the fact that is almost a by-word for 'over budget, over time and flawed'.