WELLINGTON TOPICS

Hokitika Guardian, 21 November 1928, Page 2

WELLINGTON TOPICS

SUCCESSFUL CAN!)I DATES

INELATED MAJORITIES

(Special to “Guardian”.)

WELLINGTON, November 19

Some exception has been taken here to the manner in which the local newspapers represented the majorities by which tile successful candidates at the recent parliamentary election secured their seat's. Where there were more than two candidates in the field they did not measure the success of the candidate at the head of the poll by comparing the number of votes cast for him with the total number off votes cast against him. They simply took the number of votes polled by the candidate at the head of the poll and compared'it with Qie number of votes polled by the .candidate second on the list and proclaimed' that the former had won the. seat by so much of a majority. By this means quite a number of the seventeen candidates in the Auckland district who secured fewer than half the votes polled are represented as having won their seats by very substantial majorities. What really has happened is that these candidates have got into Parliament by the aid of a system of election which offends against every principle of popular representation.

CASES IN POINT.

Take, for instance, the more flagrant of the seventeen Auckland seats, in which there were more than two candidates. Mr J. B. Donald was credited with ft pinjortiy of 236 on the first count, in Auckland East, while as a matter of fact he was in a minority of 1849; Mr M. J. Savage was credited with a inanity of 1394 > n Auckland West, while he was actually in a minority of 1820 and the Hon. J. A. Young was credited with a majority of 933, while as a matter of fact lie was in a minority of 1144. In Auckland Suburbs, Mi H. G. R. Mason’s majority was really a minority of 1056; in Parnell, Mr H. R. Jenkins’s majority of 940 a minority of 658; Mr C. H, Clinkard’s majprity of 185, a minority of 981, and so on and so on through the whole length of the Auckland province. In the Hawke’s Bay province Mr H. L. Campbell’s majority of 680 was a minority of no less than 2115. In Taranaki there was only one contest with more than two candidates and iu. this Mr S. G. Smith’s big poll pulled him through with a clear majority o|f 159.

A MINORITY HOUSE

In Wellington and further South similar unsatisfying results were recorded. Mr W. A. Veitch’s majority of 4651 wgs really a minority of 608; Mr W. H. Field’s majority of 676 a minority of 861,' and Mr Semple’s majority of 1066 a minority of 1403. In mid-Canterbury Mr D. Jones’s majority of 69 wub a minority of 973; mr R, W. Hawke’s majority otf 93, a minority of 2696; Mr H. Hollands majority of 1768, a minority of 15ol; Mr E. J. Howard’s majority of 376 a minority of 1299; Mr McCombs’s majority of 1878 a minority of 682; Mr A. E. Ansell’s majority of 583 a minority of 1399; Mr J. W. Munro’s majority of 1128, a minority otf 1859, and Mr R. W. Hall’s majority of 20 a minority of 1968. Of the six Ministeis who survived the blast that overwhelmed the Cabinet, only Mr Coates, and Mr K. S. Williams polled clear majorities, while Mr J. A. Young, Mr R. A. Wright, and Mr W. D. Stewart, joined the great throng of minority representatives and Mr G. J. Anderson remains in grave peril of ultimate defeat.

ELECTORAL REFORM.

It Will be surprising indeed if the results briefly enumerated here do not move the jpublic to demand Borne measure of electoral reform in the immediate tfuture. Sixty years ago Sir Frederick Whitaker was emphasising the need for some step‘being taken in this direction. Sir William Fox, Sir Harry Atkinson, Sir John Hall, Sir Robert Stout, Mr John Ballance, Sir Joseph Ward, Mr W. F. Massey, and Sir Francis Bell among the Prime Ministers of the Dominion have made practical suggestions towards, this end. Sir Francis Bell, fourteen years ago took the trouble to master all the details of proportional representation in its application to legislative institutions and is responsible for the measure bearing on the subject now rusting on the New-Zealand Statute Book. His advice to the public at the present time would be invaluable." Sir Joseph Ward has pledged the United Party to preferential voting, a great advance upon the present system of election, and as a stepping stone towards the more comprehensive system it should be welcomed by a community that so frequently has been robbed of the direction of its own affairs.