Electoral System

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XIV, Issue 279, 5 November 1924, Page 5

Electoral System

Leg islatureAmendment Bill COMPULSORY ENROLMENT. TKOPOKTION'AL AGAIN. (Per Press Association.) Wellington, Nov. 4. In moving the second reading of the Legislature Amendment Bill No 2 in the House of Representatives to-day. Mr Massey said tho measure contained three important provisions. In tho past the methods adopted*to secure complete enrolment had been unsatisfactory. There had been complaints after each election. Persons were requireu hi register within four months of the passing of the Act or after the date on which they become qualified to be registered as doctors. For neglecting to register a fine of 5s was provided for a first offence and 20s for any subsequent convie.ttion. Electors must no tify changes of address when they move within the electorate for which they are registered. Similar fines were provided for neglecting to do so but failure to notify a change of address shall not disqualify an elector from voting. Suqh provision was a safeguard against any elector. Temporary absence from a district would not* be disqualification unless qn elector became resident in another electorate oi was qualified to become so registered. If there <was an absence of three months it would be the duty of an elector to notify the registrar. There wi.s provision for the notification of deaths of registered electors by the registrar of deaths, also for the notification of tho marriage of female electors so that the rolls c.mid be amended. Section 9 provided for the compilation of a nclv roll after the commencement of the Act anil the next section provides for the abolition of existing rolls nnd tho closing ill to of rolls nnd the printing thereof. In the case of a by-election there was a machinery clause to enable tho department to appoint one registrar to act for mure than one electoral district. In the four principal cit> ?? it was proponed, for general information and administrative pur poses, to group tho csty electoral offices under one officer. It was proposed to amend section 52 of tr.e Legislature Amendment Act. 1910, by repealing sub section 3 to 7 dealing with' thcTTomovul of the names of non-voters at a general election from the roll.t. Th'existing method had been found unsatisfactory and unworkable. Section 13 made provision lor a more convenient ami effective VyStern, of absent voting. It was not applicable to senmen, who would vote under tho exist mu special provisions in the Legislature Act. Section 14 provided foi rw classes of persons voting by declaration on election day, and repealed the pre visions tn section 13 of the Kxpcdi tionary Forces Voting Amendment Act of 1919. Section, 15 made the residential period in an electoral district three months Instead of one month as at present. Mr T. W. Rhodes (Thames) regretted that there was dl adequate provision In the bill to enable invalid persons to vote. The Hon. D. Buddo (Kaiapoi) ventilated the same appeal. The bill was read tho second time. PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION. In- committee Mr J. McCombs (Lyttelton) said he regretted the absence of anything in the nature of proportion!’.! representation in the bill. The recent election in Britain showed the need for some reform, but bad ns things were in Britain, they were worse in New Zealand. Mr Isrtt (Christchurch North; welcomed the bill with gladness, because he believed it would cuntribute towards a pure roll, but he was afraid attempts to enable invalids to vote would result in extensive impersonations. Mr rf f*. Holland (Buller) contended that once a < elector’s name was on the roll it should not be open to challenge except through the medium of criminal proceedings. Most of the changes in the bill were needed, but he regretted the absence of proportional represntnticn. His party would move amendments in that direction as the bill proceeded He claimed that the time had arrived when there should be a printed roil for Maori elections. Mr W. A. Veitch (Wanganpi) said the disappointment of the bill was tffat there was no electoral reform in it unless compulsory enrolment could be socalled. He deplored the absence of all reference to proportional representation. It was unfortunate/ that Parliament was controlled by a group who refused to bring tho electoral law into line with the neeeds and wishes of the people. Several other speakers also advocated reform of the Maori elections. Mr Massey, in reply, said alterationhad been made in the law regulating Maori elections some years ago, but it was found impossible to carry them out. One of the difficulties was that most Maoris had several names, and could go on several rolls, arid it would he impossible to check them. He per sc.nally favoured endeavouring to give sick poeple votes, but the greatest objections came from medical men. who did not wish patients to be worried by politics. Ho did not bring down proportional representation because ho Was not satisfied it would prove satisfactory. It was not a perfect system, and he did not think they would get a perfect system. He did not propose to bring down another electoral bill this session, but there might be one next year. Mr Wilford said he wanted to sec proportional representation given effect to, but he could not move to include it in this bill, because it involved an appropriation. Next session the Prem ier ought to put a straightforward motion before tho House, and let'the House give a straight-out expression of opinion on it. If that were done lie wool be satisfied, whatever the result might be, but at present all they could do was to remain dissatisfied with the present system. The Premier, in reply, said the suggestion made by Mr Wilford was not n find one. and next session ho might adopted it. He did not think there w n majority in the House for proportional representation. Mr G. W. Forbes: What about first past tho post? Mr Massey: I think the majority prefer it to proportional representation. Mr P, Fraser (Wellington Central) objected to the proposal to extend the residential qualification from one to three months, contending that it would be injurious to workers. Mr Massey said any elector who had shifted his residence could vote in his old electorate if he svas not a resident three months in the new district. However, if members during the recess found there were injustices or anomalies .he would be prepared to consider further amendments next* Button. AMENDMENT RULED OUT. Mr McCombs moved a lengthy amendment to give effect th proportional representation, preserving the countrv quota and being limited to tho 76 European constituencies. The Hon. W. D. Stewart raised a point of order that the amendment would involve a charge upon the Crown w4 ftorofow could w>*

moved by a private member. He said that at any other time he would not have raised the point, but in tho dying hours of tho session the House could not afford time in an academic discussion on proportional representation. Tho Chairman of Committees upheld the objection, ruling that ths amend meat involved an appropriation uJ pub lie money. Mr McCombs questioned. the ruling and asked that Mr Speaker bo called in to review it. This was done and Mr McCombs contended that elections would have to be held whether under proportional representation! or not. Elections in Tasmania and in the city of Christchurch were no more costly than elsewhere. Mr Stewart and Mr Massey contended that the expenditure untler thu new system would be enormous. Tho Seapker said tho whole question was whether or not tho present expenditure would be increased. Mr D. Cf. Sullivan (Avon) said his experience as a candidate for the Christohurcb City Council was that proportional representation was the cheapest system. Mr Massey said there was no comparison between an election in Christchurch city and one over tho whole of New Zealand. The head of the Elco toral .Department had just informed him, that it would cost £lO,OOO to bring this system into operation. Air Veith pleaded for a generous interpretation of tho Standing Orders to enable a member of the House td ex orciso his constitutional rights in plao ing such an amendment before the House for decision. Mr H. T. Armstrong anjl Air J. Edie argued in favour of proportional repr<* sentation. Air Stewart pointed out that the licensing poll must be taken in the ordinary way. That meant there must be combined rolls for the Parliamentary election “find single rolls for the licensing poll. This meant an increased expense in printing. Air AlcCombs contended that no now rolls would be required. Tho old rolls could be used -for the combined districts just as at present - . After .further debate the Speaker said he had to deal with only one phase of the question. Did the amendment involve increased expenditure? The most authentic information he had on this point was the statement of the head of he department passed on to tho House by the Premier that Ihe preliminary expenditure on proportional representation would cost at least £lO,OOO. There were other minor as peets of tho case, but that seemed to govern tho position and he must a'uio the amendment out of order. THE BILL PASSED. The committee st?ge was then completed and the bill was read the third time and passed. WHAT MIGHT HAVE HAPPENED AT HOME. VOTES AND REPRESENTATION. (Special to “Tribune.”) Parit. Buildings, Nov. 5. What might have happened in the recent elections at Home had the proportional representation system been in operation sas related in the House of Representatives yesterday by Air. J. McCombs (Lyttelton) when speaking upon the Legislature Amendment Bill (No. 2). “We see .what a huge fiasco the recent election in Great Britain has resulted in,” he said. “An overwhelming majority in the House of Commons, representing a minority of the people of the country. -If there had been an equitable system of election the Conservatives instead of having 407 repre_ «;entatives would have, had 288; the Labour Party, instead of having 152 representatives, would have had 208, and tlie Liberals, instead of having 41 representatives, would have 108.” Mr. Wilford: A hundred and eleven. Mf. McCombs: Well, possibly I have got some of them covered in the other figures with the Independents. Anyhow, the Conservatives would be entitled to 288 representatives and those who were opposed to them to 316. a clear majority of 28 in the House of Commons. No one can pretend that that is a satisfactory position. So far ns Britain or the Empire is concerned it cannot be satisfactory when it is known in the constituencies, and it must, and will be known, that there is a Government in power which has not got the confidence and support of a majority of the people in the country. Unsatisfactory as that position is, still more unsatisfactory has been the position in New Zealand for the last twelve years or more. Air. Massey said he .was against proportional representation, as it raised so many objections that he could not possibly support it, except in the form in which it appeared in the first bill.