Patea & Waverley Press MONDAY, AUGUST 27, 1923. LET WELL ALONE

Patea Mail, Volume XLVI, 27 August 1923, Page 2

Patea & Waverley Press MONDAY, AUGUST 27, 1923. LET WELL ALONE

IT is interesting to note that the Christchurch City Council has decided, after a somewhat trying experience of the Proportional Representation system, to revert to the “first past the post” method of electing members to the Council. Strangely enough, although the proportional system of voting has been approved by the Leader of the Liberal Party, the “New Zealand Times,” which has always been regarded as the official organ of the party, is adverse to the system, and after an exhaustive enquiry into the merits and demerits o. J f proportional representation has come to the conclusion that it has nothing to

recommend as a substitute for the bare majority or first past the post system. Like many other ideas held by the extremists, the proportional representation system appears, at first sight, to be an excellent thing, but on closer examination it is found that it would be anything but a blessing to this country. As a matter of fact, it could only be applied outside the large centres to huge electorates of an altogether unwieldly nature, with the result that the electors would be as ignorant of the candidates as the latter would be of the districts they aspired to represent. In the present simple first past the post system mistakes very frequently occur in the counting of the votes, with the result that election petitions are by no means unknown. What the position would be with a more complicated system it is not difficult to imagine. With so scattered a population as New Zealand’s, proportional representation would be an absurdity and would result in scarcely a member being returned to Parliament with the confidence of a majority of his constituents. In other words, the system would defeat the very object it is sought to attain, as a large majority of electors would be voting more or less in the dark. Both in New South Wales and in Tasmania, where proportional representation has been in vogue in' connection with Parliamentary elections, the system has proved more than disappointing. In New South Wales both the Labour Party and the Nationalists are tired of it, and would like to revert to the first past the post system, but the “Progressive” party, who, by the way, are far from being the dominant party in New South Wales, favour the retention of the newfangled system, with the result that the Government, which depends on the support of the Progressivists for its existence, will not take any steps to revert to the old system. If a straight-out vote of the people were to be taken on the question there is no doubt that the old first past the post system would be restored, for it has been abundantly proved that the proportional system practically enables a minority to dominate the majority, instead of the reverse being the case. After all, seeing that it would be an impossibility to allow every elector a seat in Parliament, elections of representatives of the people must be held, and the minority must bow to the will of the majority. So far, no better System of carrying the democratic principle of majority rule into effect than the “first past the post” method has been discovered, and electors would do well to adhere to this, in view of the experience of the working of the proportional system in New South Wales, Tasmania and Christchurch. The electoral law, affecting as it does the welfare of every individual, is a dangerous, law to tamper with, and governments should be very sure of their ground before they introduce innovations with regard to it, particularly those innovations which appeal to the opponents of constitutional government as the proportional system does. In New Zealand, in particular, the Government would be wise to let well alone.