Country Quota

Dominion, Volume 39, Issue 27, 26 October 1945, Page 6

Country Quota

Sir, —No better illustration of the fundamental unsoundness of the country quota principle could be found than the contention in the letter over the signature of T. F. Simpson, that the number of urban seats in AVellington and Auckland should be reduced by one-half, which clearly indicates that the supporters of the country quota disregard the elementary franchise rights of urban electors.

The existing position is that, iu ten rural electorates, there are 95,516 electors compared with 174,812 in ten Auckland urban electorates. This menus that ICO rural electors have the same voting strength—the same Parliamentary representation —as 187 urban electors. Air. Simpson now suggests that the number of urban electorates should he reduced by one-half, which would mean, taking the same electorates, that each 100 rural electors would have in effect 366 votes for every 100 votes enjoyed by urban electors. In other words, your correspondent advocates that rural electors be given thrce-and-two-lhirds votes for every urban elector. Is any further proof needed to establish that the country quota principle is distinctly, dangerous Io the franchise rights of urban communities?

Urban electors arc entitled to expect that their parliamentary representatives will support the Bill irrespective of party, and so ensure to their constituents the right of a full and effective vote. — I am. etc., URBAN ELECTOR. Wellington. October 23.