VOTING METHODS.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19764, 15 April 1926, Page 15

VOTING METHODS.

PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION. Proportional representation Is advocated chiefly on the ground that it safeguards the rights of minorities. In a very succinct and convincing exposition of “ Proportional Kepresentatlon: Us Dangers and Defect*, ’ however. Mr George Horwill suggests that advocates of proportional representation are in danger of accepting the conventional Idea cf its merits without analysing its practlca. effects (says the Melbourne Argus). The underlying motive of the agitation for proportional representation, he declares. Is to procure for leaders of minority opinion a place in politics without as much labour as is required by the majority electoral system. The proof lies In the fact that it Is always the small minority which supports proportional representation, while the minority which is large enough to warrant the expectation of its becoming a majority as strongly opposes It, the hostile policy of the Australian Labour Party being an illusrratiC>Mr Horwili’s arguments against the adoption of proportional representation are those which have prevailed against Its widespread introduction In British communities for many years. The first is that It would substitute the group for the party In politics. The party, a combination of persons holding similar views on broad, general Issues, would give place to groups united only by a common interest in or a similarity of opinion concerning a single subject. Then, again, proportional representation postulates the larger constituency—the larger for the purposes of proportional representation the better. The most ignorant of men would have an excellent chance of election in these circumstances, provided they were backed by some popular organisation, some church, or some minor political group, such as the Communists, the Fascists. Many examples of the increasing tendency of proportional "presentation to split the constituency into Innumerable groups are quoted from those countries in Europe where proportional representation is law. In Belgium In 1923, after 20 years of proportional representation, there were 45 different parties. In many European countries the system has made stable government impossible. Parliamentary government under the old system may not have been always an accurate reflection of public opinion, but it did maintain stability in social relationships, and it did give the security necessary to continuous development. Under proportional representation there is to be found neither stability nor certai”ty nor independence of administration. Politics have become an affair of confused elections, shifting alliances, and Immoral bargainings The Legislatures so elected may express the views of minorities; they certainly prevent government by the majority. The result has been that out of the confusion there has sometimes emerged, as in Italy, a minority dictatorship. Large constituencies and a multiplicity of groups have created a confusion of Ideas, and have distracted public attention from crucial Issues to the point at which the people have lost all Interest In politics and juntos have seized control. . . ~ , One particularly disquieting result of proportional representation in practice has been to discount thet value of political personality and character. Members of the Legislatures elected by proportional representation inevitably lose contact with the majority of their constituencies, because these are so large. The result is that the party organisation becomes the real power, and the member or the candidate who offends it soon finds that there is no place for him. On the other hand, the candidate who can best advertise himself, be his methods legitimate or questionable, is the candidate who finds victory easiest. The man of ideas who cannot play to the gallery goes to the wall. Similarly in Parliament talk—which is sufficiently superfluous under the majority electoral system—is lengthened interminably because of the multiplicity of groups, each advocating its particular fad. There is a minimum of useful legislation and a maximum of time-wasting. Mr Horwill well sums up the case by in sisting that if majorities are exaggerated by the svstems favoured by British communities, social life, so far from being injured, is quickened. The Government is enabled more quickly to act, to gain experience of action, and to test itg theories in the process. Minorities may be under-represented, but their lack of representation only makes them the more active and that in itself is the best possible tonic for them. The test of life, after all, is effectual action, and the system which minimises conflict and conduces to effectual action is the most siiccessful. Exaggerated political representation is simply a reflex of life. Politics is no more an exact science than life itself is an exact reward of merits or an exact punishment of demerits. The hook is full of most interesting returns of elections under proportional representation and of analysis of counting under the proportional representation system; and the appendices include forceful indictments of the system in the House of Commons by statesmen holding such radically divergent views on other issues as Sir Austen Chamberlain and Mr Ramsay MacDonald.