PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION.

Manawatu Times, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 12785, 7 May 1914, Page 8

PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION.

MR. McNAB'S ADDRESS. There was a large attendance at the Empire Hall last evening to hear Mr McNab's views on proportional representation. Mr E. 0. Hurley presided, and said the large attendance was a compliment to Mr McNab. On rising Mr McNab was very warmly applauded. He said he hoped the audience would realise the importance of the problem to be put before them. He would deal with the question on non-party lines. (Applause.) He contended that the people had lost

a great deal through proportional representation not being put on the Statute Book. He stated that in 1893 there were 153,000 people who voted for the successful candidates and 149,000 who voted against the members elected, and who did not have a say in Parliament. He contended that it would not have mattered as far as the election of members was concerned if that 149,000 had never been born. At last election 259,000 people elected the members Avhile 208,000 had no representation in the House. What was desired was that there should be no such thing as non-representation. The vote was given so that they should have representation which they were hot getting at present. The system should be altered so that every elector should have his representative in Parliament. Under the absolute majority system they could elect as many members as they liked, but still it did not overcome the difficulty. He contended that in New Zealand at the present time a minority could get four-fifths of the votes. The same thing happened in the Mother Country. This was due to taking individual constituencies and in these constituencies pitting one man against another. It was difficult to ask politicians to do away with this system as a certain political party would probably know what the result would be and go against it. He did not blame members for supporting the system that put them in power. All representatives of proportiosal representation should go before the electors and ask them to remedy the position as they had the remedy in their own hands. The speaker gave an illustration On a blackboard, writing three names, Smith, Brown and Jones. Under the present system if Smith gets 100 votes, Brown 80 and Jones GO Smith is declared elected. They would naturally say Smith got in by a majority of 20 and they did not bother about Jones at all. They had to get to the root of the evil and alter the ballot paper. Under proportional representation they voted Smith 100 —1, Brown 80—2, Jones 60 —3. They then struck out Jones, but not the 60, and those 60 in selecting the next in preference may have wanted Brown, but not Smith, and consequently Brown got in. Proportional representation would be put upon the Statute next session and electors would have to vote on it at next election for members of the Upper House. There was no use under proportional representation of having one or two members contesting a seat. They wanted at least three contesting members. He was advocating that the constitutencies should consist of five which allowed three political parties to get representation. He advocated taking the five centres separately. To illustrate this matter further they would take the district from Wellington up to Palmerston, exclusive of the city, and across to Pahiatua, and then again they would have a very fair district. Supposing there were 10,000 electors every member should have 2000 votes. If two members had 2000 votes each they would not be allowed to collar the votes of the remainder. The number of votes cast should be divided by the number of men to be elected. The people voted for as many candidates under the system as they felt they were expressing their preference by numbering the candidates in the order of preference. There was no complication to the voter and there was no such thing as plumping under the system as people ran a risk of only voting for one and not making a second and third choice.

A number of ballot papers were then distributed and the audience asked to vote and the result and proportions were worked out and demonstrated by the speaker. He explained that under the system the cities did not come into competition with the country and enabled them to retain their quota. The speaker said that ballot papers after the election should be taken to Wellington and kept there, and if a member died all they had to do waf to look up the votes of his supporters and see who the next man was that they had given their preference to to fill the gap. A hearty vote of thanks was accorded to the speaker.