Preferential Voting.

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume X, Issue 20, 7 January 1920, Page 5

Preferential Voting.

DISAPPROVING CRITICISM. BY BOTH PARTIES. CURIOUS ANOMALIES. IN AUSTRALIAN SENATE. (By Cable.—Press Association.—Copyright.) (Received 7, 8.50 a-m.) Sydney, Jan. 7. There is much disapproving criticism in both Nationalist and Labour circles everywhere over the Senate system of preferential voting, which has resulted in practically giving the Nationalists a monopoly of the Upper House that is described as neither just nor wholesome. Labour is decidedly sore as on the hulk of votes recorded the party would under the old system have* won several seats which the preferential system denied themOther curious anomalies are disclosed. Four New South Wales candidates forfeited deposits, including Mr. Garling (Nationalist), who polled heavily but failed to secure the necessary primaries.

There were seventy thousand informal Senate votes in New South Wales alone- —(A. and N.Z.) LABOUR LEADER’S VIEW. Mr. Ryan declared that the new voting system was one of the causes of Labour’s defeat at the elections, but he added that, on the whole, the party had improved its position since 1917. He was strongly opposed to the suggested coalition with the Farmers’ Party. Mr. Tudor, in returning thanks for his election, attributed the Labour defeat to sectarianism and apathy, resulting in the profiteers’ victory. NATIONALISTS FOR SA(Received 7, 10.20 a.m.) Adelaide, Jan. 7. The Senate count for South jAlstralia is completed and resulted in the return of three Nationalists. —(A. and N-Z.)