The Dominion. WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 18, 1935. THE FRANCHISE AND ITS EXERCISE

Dominion, Volume 29, Issue 72, 18 December 1935, Page 10

The Dominion. WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 18, 1935. THE FRANCHISE AND ITS EXERCISE

In the last New Zealand Parliament there were eighteen minority s members. In this Parliament there are thirty-five. Up to a point, therefore, the position against which advocates of preferential voting warned the late Government has arisen. Only up to a point, because there was a possibility, with party allegiances so confused and with so many candidates in the field, of government, being placed in the hands of a minority party composed largely of minority members. I hat is not so. The Labour Party is in an overwhelming majority, and many more than half its members are majority members. Under preferential voting the personnel of the House would have been somewhat different from what it is, but the Government would still have been defeated and the Labour Party elected to power. Of that there can be no question. And, of course, the fact that a member has been returned by a minority of votes cast is not to say that he would not'have. been returned under preferential voting. There is.only one instance in all the thirty-five of the successful candidates polling less than 3000 votes. In that instance his combined opponents polled more than 5000, and it seems likely that a distribution of preferences would have' altered the result. On the other hand, members like Mr. Lowry, in Otaki, and Sir Alfred Ransom, in Pahiatua, are minority representatives by a mere handful bf votes, and would almost certainly have been returned whatever the voting system. This is a matter upon which it is impossible to generalise: everything depends upon the candidates themselves. One man returned on a small minority would likely have been returned under preferential voting; another returned on a similar minority would likely have been defeated under preferential voting. It may be said that the system is inconsistent, but the real explanation is that the ability of candidates is uneven. And, since one of the aims of the electorate should be to return candidates of as high a level of political capacity as possible, any system which will assist it in making that selection is to be commended. Party ought not to enter into the question. Although, as it happens, the balance of parties is in no way affected, it is not satisfactory that almost one-third of the Government members of the present House of Representatives should have been returned on minority votes, and almost two-thirds of the Opposition members. There are two ways in which repetition of such a condition could be avoided. Either by getting back to the two-party system of government, with a clear-cut division (which would discourage middle parties and Independent candidates), or by preparing to resist the upsetting influence of a multitude of candidates at any future election by altering the electoral system to provide for, say, preferential voting in the country and proportional representation in the metropolitan areas. Not long ago the -Labour Party was in favour of proportional representation. Now that it has reached office, however, and has a substantial majority of votes over the Opposition, Labour is unlikely to favour any alteration in the present system, especially as it insists that there are already only two parties and that party differences are already clear-cut. ■ Of more practical importance is the question of compulsory, voting. This year a shade over 90.5 of enrolled electors voted, which is the highest percentage since 1925, when the figure was 90.92. In 1928 it was 88.65, and in 1931 83.26. Electoral apathy has never been so pronounced in this country as in Australia. In 1917 there was a 78 per cent, poll for the Commonwealth House of Representatives, the highest since federation in 1901. But the 1919 elections showed a considerable falling off, and in 1922 less than 60 per cent, of eligible electors voted. Before the next election compulsory voting was intro-, duced, with the result that the percentage jumped from under 60 to over 90. In 1925 this was improved upon, and in 1931 improved upon again, 95 per cent, of those eligible to vote doing so. Ninetyfive per cent, is still beyond our reach in New Zealand, but we run pretty consistently in the eighties. For the three general elections preceding those already mentioned, the percentages of enrolled electors voting were: 1914, 84.66; 1919, 80.53; 1922, 88.65. Registration of electors has been compulsory in New Zealand since the end of 1924, which probably was responsible for making the 1925 poll the heaviest to .that date. In 1928 our exercise of the franchise fell away a little, and in 1931, probably because there was no licensing poll that year, it fell away considerably. Now we are back above 90 per cent., which can be considered satisfactory. Nevertheless, if compulsory voting could make a difference in Australia between 78 per cent, (the previous maximum,) and 95 per cent., it seems reasonable to hope that it might enable us in New Zealand to exceed a poll of 95 per cent. The new Government is much more likely to be inclined toward this reform than toward any alteration in the system of voting.