VOTING SYSTEM.

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLVII, Issue 131, 3 May 1927, Page 7

VOTING SYSTEM.

OFFICIAL’S CONDEMNATION. NEW METHOD SUGGESTED. CHRISTCHURCH, May 2. The more the returning officer (Mr A l ' art Freeman) sees of tlie checking < votes in the election of councillors to the Christchurch City Council, the less does he like the new voting paper prescribed by tlio Act for the occasion, and the system of voting by crossing out the names of the candidates not wanted he considers to bo the worst he has seen. All this is from a returning officer’s point of view of course. “The system stands condemned out of its own mouth, as it were,” said Mr Freeman to-day. “It is a negative form of voting and although the principle is good in practice it is a failure. In a case such as voting for the mayor, or in which there are only three or four names to be dealt with it is all right, but when there is a paper containing 34 names and 16 or less have to be left In, it’s —it’s the very devil.” Never before had there been such a large percentage of informal votes in a Christchurch municipal election, for over 4000 people had invalidated their papers, and the officials who were counting the papers found that many people had but a vague idea of the meaning of the phrase “crossing out.” Indistinct and irregular obliterating marks had been the cause of much delay. Mr Freeman suggested that a better method than crossing out would be for voters to place numerals opposite the names of those votes, each vote given, of course, , 'x> have equal value. This would enable the voter to ascertain easily that no more than the number of councillors required had been voted for. As to the voting paper, the returning officer pointed out that the old paper, which set out each name between lines and gave a square at the side for the cross, was easier to follow than the new one as it brought each name prominently before the voter.