Electoral Reform

Dominion, Volume 25, Issue 68, 14 December 1931, Page 13

Electoral Reform

Sir,—ln spite of the fact that the Government has been returned with a substantial majority, it is surprising to find that (in the opinion of your correspondent “Elector,” who has a decided bias towards Reform), the present electoral system is unfair. He says it is obviously unfair to vote for one man, and one man only. Does he mean that it is unfair to the candidates or to the elector? He also, says the only solution is perferential voting. Does he mean preferential for the candidates or for the elector? By that I mean, can the elector vote for only one candidate if lie prefers to, or musr he vote for all three He desires to be enlightened on the disadvantages of the preferential system. I am prepared to enlighten him if he will first enlighten me by answering these questions. I think “Elector” has made some mistakes in his figures. He gives Labdur 3000 points from Reform, 3000 from United. These should be Reform 2800, United 2600. He gives United 2600 from Labour, whereas it should be 3000. He gives l Reform 5600 from Labour. This should be 6000. This will give Reform a greater majority, but there will be no objection to that. Your correspondent says that supporters of the Labour cause will, no doubt argue that this method is against their interests. I do not think he will get any objections from' this quarter, as the preferential system is used in the trades unions for the election of their secretaries, presidents, etc. The only difference between the two systems (as “Elector” has set them out) is, that with the present system Labour is elected with a minority of over 2000 votes. With the preferential system Reform is elected with a minority of nearly 15,000 points. I think that “Elector” has failed to show that the preferential system has any advantages over the present system. In the absence of more conclusive evidence the only conclusion is that both systems ’are wrong, and that we need somo genius to devise a system whereby (in a three-cornered contest) one candidate can get a clear majority over the other two - . . ' . Much eould be said m disfavour of the preferential system, but when fully enlightened 11 may be able to see the advantages of it- As I understand it, and as set out by “Elector,” it does not commend itself to me. .■ I consider it is an absolutely unfair system.—l am, etc., 1 DHU. December 8.