THE abysmally-low turnouts in the elections for the Welsh assembly and local councils earlier this month highlighted yet again, as no doubt will those in 10 days' time for the European Parliament, how endemic apathy is among British voters when they are not allocating seats at Westminster.

But although this phenomenon has already inspired the government to look for novel ways of redressing this widespread indifference - with ideas ranging from electronic polling booths in supermarkets, American-style 'executive' mayors and all council seats being up for grabs at once and more often - the latest proposal is much more radical and, possibly, specious.

This is for the introduction of voting by telephone. And, we are told, pilot projects are already being drawn up to allow people the first-ever opportunity to vote on the day of the election itself from their own homes, workplaces or elsewhere.

And with the advent of interactive digital television and the growth of the Internet and computerised electronic mail, no doubt the advocates of this departure are already tweaking the system to accommodate them.

The attractions of the scheme are obvious . Apart from the perceived need for greater popular endorsement of our representatives and their policies, there is a huge potential advance to be had in the concomitant electronic counting that will be inherent in the new system. Not only would the results of elections be virtually instant, there would be a vast reduction of the cost and logistics of trimming down and perhaps eventually the doing away with altogether of the present system with its armies of polling station officials, police. counting clerks and scrutineers. The weary recounts in the small hours would be rendered unnecessary and the complexities that proportional representation would add to the current manual procedure would be swiftly smoothed away by software.

But as is is known by anyone who has ever put their trust in a computer or has battled with a touch-tone telephone service requiring callers to express their needs or preferences by pressing buttons, things can go wrong - and placing something as important as an election in the hands of new technology, no matter how secure or sophisticated, is laden with risk.

Equally important is the issue of quality versus quantity. True, more people might be induced to vote if they may do so by phone, but will they be serious voters - as are those who take the trouble at present to go to their local polling station? And since telephone voting would be free - because the law forbids any charges on voting - it would be an open invitation to frivolous candidates to seek the votes of the frivolous who normally would not bother to register theirs.

Greater democracy, perhaps, but better?

Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.