Evening Post. WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 21, 1921. "THREE-PARTYISM" AND "CRISES"

Evening Post, Volume CII, Issue 149, 21 December 1921, Page 6

Evening Post. WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 21, 1921. "THREE-PARTYISM" AND "CRISES"

The successive Cabinet crises ifa New South Wales constitute a political phenomenon that is far idore common in association with the three-party form, or the group form, of party politics, than in association with the two-party condition. For riiany years the New Zealand Lower chamber was clearly divided into two solid parties, and independent members were few, or weak, or non-existent. Such a condition made for a clear working majority on one side or the other; consequently, for a stable Parliament, running its full three years, immune from Cabinet'crises, one-man majorities, " hawked" Speakerships, various intrigues, and dissolutions. Such was the Ballance-Seddon period. But when, after the death of Mr. Seddou, Labour moved more and more towards an independent position^ and a three-party divisior of membership began to appear, the New Zealand House became subject to those cross-currents of intrigue to which the multiplication of parties— aggravated in this case by the late, birfc not lamented, second ballot — inevitably lends itself. The change became visible in the closing days of the. Ward Ministry and during the short-lived Mackenzie Ministry, and was particularly evidenced in certain second ballot events that reflected /little credit' on all concerned. New Zealanders have almost forgotten that at one time it appeared that even the fate of the Government might depend on a certain by-election in a Maori electorate. It happened, however, as much by good luck as by good management, that the party instability of eight or nine.years ago proved temporary. At each subsequent ejection the Massey Government won an absolute majority of seats, if not of votes ; and as it did not replace the second ballot by something better than first-past-the-post, and as it has latterly recanted its proportional representation principles, it has been able to stabilise its position in the House. In seats, though not in votes, the Mas'soy . Government is stronger than Labour and Liberalism combined; and that is why New Zea-. land, although subject during the last decade to a modified form of three-partyism, has not been seriously affected by Cabinet crises and the related political phenomena referred to in the opening sentence of this article. '

New South Wales is in a different position, because the Lower Chamber is elected by a process of proportional voting. Nevertheless, what is going on in that Chamber is of interest to New Zealanders, who know not how soon the day may arrive when none of the three (perhaps four or five) parties in this country will be able to command, either in votes or in seats, an absolute majority. "When that day comes, will an independent or a Maori member hold the balance of power in the House, or will the Speakership be "hawked" as it has been in New South Wales 1 A Prime Minister with a safe working majority does not need to be a very keen student of the constitutional law and principles governing Cabinet resignations and dissolutions; but in New South Wales both the Government and the Opposition leaders have to be well versed in this branch of the Constitution, because it seems that the most important thing, next to holding the Government Benches, is to secure the dissolution. It is for this advantageous position that Mr. Dooley (Labour) and Sir George Fuller (Nationalist) have lately been sparring. In the first place, Mr. Dooley, having failed to indue* * pon-L«>brnu'.member to nu* cept the vacant SpsakersUip, was

without a working majority, was therefore unable to carry on, and asked for a dissolution, which the Governor of the State quite rightly refused. Sir George Fuller then formed a Cabinet, partly in the forlorn hope that the third party (Progressives) would support him, but mostly in the hope that he might himself secure the desired dissolution, which the Governor again refused. The third stage —at time of writing still in progress—is the issue by the Governor of a fresh commission to Mr. Dooley to form a Government; so it now seems that, if all members of the Chamber continue to stand in their present positions, the party that will go to the country as Government will be Labour. Shortly put, the duty of the Governor is to exhaust the possibilities of the House before dissolving it; and the issue of commissions firstly to the Opposition (Nationalists) and then to the late Government (Labour) seems to place His Excellency well abreast of the constitutional requirements of his post.

Apart from constitutional principles, and as a matter of horse sense, a General Election is needed. The chief danger is that the voting will again be so evenly divided as to provide no working majority. As a further test of proportional voting the election should be of great value.