Manawatu Daily Times. SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 1923. PIEBALD HORSE—BETTER THAN NO STEED.

Manawatu Times, Volume XLVII, Issue 2743, 8 September 1923, Page 4

Manawatu Daily Times. SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 1923. PIEBALD HORSE—BETTER THAN NO STEED.

The Leader of the Liberal-Labour Opposition is no less happy in the coming - of striking phrases than is the leader of the Labour Party. Speaking - in his own constituency on Wed. nesday, Mr Wilford touched briefly on Mr Massey’s proposals for electoral reform. “Wo feel t'o-day,” ho said, speaking for himself and for the members of his party, “that a strong hoi-se called ‘Electoral Reform’ is needed to carry us aver the dreary desert of Parliamentary elections as at present conducted; and though w r e consider that’ the horse provided by the present Government is a piebald, nevertheless, wo think that a piebald horse is better than no horse. With certain committee alterations, we think that the suggested legislation may bo considered an advance on the present system, though not such an advance as wo would havo provided in the form of proportional representation with the maintenance of the country quota, had we had the opportunity of framing the legislation.” Mr Wilford confessed he had not much faith in the Government's fair promises, but he expressed himself as quite ready to co-operate with the Reform Party in instituting a better system of election. The ‘.‘Evening Post,” which doubtless feels a little embarrassed at having been on both sides of the fence in regard to Mr Wilsides of the fence in regard to proportional representation within a very short period naturally welcomes Mr Wilford’s readiness to accept a compromise. “The journey has been long de, layed,” it says, “while the Reform Party lias boon considering whether it was wise to change horses at all, and the Literals also nave had their doubts and differences (until recent years) upon the merits of the various mounts. Now some, at least, of the Reform members have come to an agreement - , and they will be supported by the i Liberals, with certain The | prospect of at last making a start j therefore appears fairly pi - %ra sing, and it should not be lost'. Labour will always oe opposed to any measure not in exact accord with Labour’s desires. In this instance, to revert to Mr Wilford’s metaphor, Labour disapproves because it believes the piebald horse conies from the Reform stable, and may make for home.” The “Post” expressed no opinion as to the propriety of returning one set of members by one system of voting, and another set by an entirely different system, but it implies that the Labour Party is actuated by purely parochial motives in resisting this startling innovation into the electoral system of the Dominion. The "Dominion” also has not been quite clear in defining its attitude towards electoral reform, but it appears to be gratified, within certain Emits, by Mr Wiiford’s acceptance of the “’piebald” horse in the absence of a better steed. It predicts that with the support of the Liberals, Mr Massey will get his Bill through the House by a majority of three to one. But all the same it has its fling at the Leader of the Opposition. “He made it a matter of complaint,” it says, “that the Bill did not provide for the general applica. tion of proportional representation, and also that the Government had not taken electoral reform in hand at an earlier date. This complaint comes well from a supporter of the party that - was in office for twenty years without making any other vital change in the system of voting than the introduction of the iniquities of the second ballot.” This is the sort of retort the politicians throw af one another, but Mr Wilford may easily have the last word by flinging back the fact that the si-stem of preferential voting Mr Massey has adopted for the great majority of the constituencies is precisely the same in principle as the iniquitous second ballot. Though the “Dominion” writes confidently of a “three-fourths” majority, provided the Liberals throw in their lot with the Reformers, probablv no one but .Mr Massey himself knows the strength of the oppos.tion his Bill will encounter from his own side of the House. He has stated that he will require assistance from both sections of the Opposition to place his proposal on the Statute Book, but it seems certain that he will receive none from the Labour Party, and probable that the Reform Party will be much divided. One of the perils of the position, from the Government’s point of view is that in committee the two sections of the Opposition might combine for the purpose of inserting universal proportional representation in the Bill. This, of course, would mean the death of the measure, as Mr Massey would not persist rvith it in that shape, but the vote would be a serious rebuff ta the Government, and possibly a grave embarrassment. Such a thing is not likeQy to happen, but it is among the possibilities, and the Prime Minister is displaying considerable courage in facing the peril with so slender a majority.