THE SECOND BALLOT BILL.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LI, Issue 214, 3 September 1908, Page 2

THE SECOND BALLOT BILL.

TIIK MIiASUKE DISCUSSED l.\ PAKUAMIiiNI'. by Telegraph.—Press Association. Wellington, Last JSiglii. In tile House or txeprcsemacives Just night the Premier moved the second rending of tiie Second Ballot Bill, designed to prevent any candidate at a Parliamentary election being returned oy u minority of the total number of votes recorded, by providing for a second ballot between the candidates obtaining first and second places at Uie first ballot in cases where neither of such candidates at such ballot shall have polled an absolute majority of the voted recorded. The Premier recognised the importance of the measure. The general machinery of the Bill was all contingent upon a second ballot. All minor requirements of the ballot were provided for without delay, confusion or any inconvenience, It was provided that a second ballot snould take place on tho seventh day after the first ballot, except in nine provincial electorates, where fourteen days were allowed. The reason for bringing down the Dill was that blie Government held there should be a majority vote for everything. A certain fact of recent elections was the increasing number of members relumed to Parliament by minorities. Iti 1905, fifteen members were so returned, 12 Government and three Opposition. He disclaimed any desire tu gain an advantage for the coining election, but held that the pas: must be a guide for the future, and unless some measure like Uic present was passed, one would be obliged to confv elude in succeeding elections t'&'e number of members returned by minorities would increase, and the time would come when a majority of the members would represent the minority of the electors. He did not believe there would be anything like the number of second ballots which some members declared there would be. Referring to the inconvenience of the second ballot, he -agreed that a general election should take place on a whole holiday. Wednesday would be made the day for an election, and if the second ballot: were necessary, the following Wednesday should be made a whole holiday. Mr.' Massey said Sir Joseph Ward had ably defended a very bad cause. His speech was one rather against absolute majority than for the second ballot. Everyone knew the Bill was! being brought down for party purposes. I.et them imagine the amount of wirepulling that would go in those seven or fourteen days. The Premier had said that private money could not suborn many votes in that time, but he (Mr.' Massey) declared that it was not private money, but the Government in power they would have to feav, especially where the strength, of the parties' was nearly equal as a result of lW first ballot. He contended the electors would not go to the second ballot in . any numbers. The Bill contained a ■ very important principle, as it disfrani chised minorities, and the question for the House to consider was whether ■ minorities should not have represcnta- ■ tion under the second ballot system.f The first and second candidates' at the • first ballot might neither represent Vne i popular view. Tie preferred the proportional representation system under which every man in the country would be represented in Parliament. Mr. Massey proceeded to Hansardise Mr. MeN&h in IAO2 nnd Mr. Fowlds in 1905 to show that both Ministers had argued against the second ballot as calculated to produce political corruption. while Mr. Millar had advocated representation for minorities. Mr. Millar congratulated Mr. Massey upon his-return to his old style. His only argument against the Bill apparently was that it would lead' to bribery and corruption, and he ou»lit to have experience enough bv this time to know better. Mr. Massey said he (Mr. Millar) had advocated representation for minorities. Well he contended minorities would be represented as ' well as majorities. The tendency of political opinion in Great Britain' was I towards the second ballot. All over the world there was a desire for political reform, and he preferred the second ballot to any other svstem. Mr. James Allen helti that the Government ought lo have re-organised the whole electoral system to grve every person in the Dominion representation. The Minister should have brought forward proportional repnI sentation as it obtained in other countries. Electors would not go to Uie second ballot, especially i H country districts, where they had to travel Vome distance lo east their votes. Ho could conceive of those voting at the second ballot being a minority of those voting at the first. Continuing, Mr Allen said it, was high lime the electoral system was revised to give minorities representation. It was better to leave our system alone than to introduce a measure tine country had not asked for and which had very serious di'iiwliacks.

Mr. Tanner objected to the Government springing surprises of this kind upon tlic country or House in tho last session of Pavliamont. The measure was not an advantageous one to pasat present. The Premiers' speech was disappointing, being loaded with reference to authorities, lie advocated pro- | portionnl representation.' - Mr. Hornsby supported the Bill as a deterrent against multiplicity of candidates and vote-splitting. He argued that it was a libel on members to"say

minorities were not represented. Dr. Chappie said the fact that undemocratic Germany adopted the second ballot made him suspect it. He did not approve of a measure which would keep out candidates, It was in the interest of the country to encourage candidates. The temptation to conniption was too great under tho second ballot He supported the absolute majority Mr. Italian said in 11)04 the Opp'oei.j lion voted against proportional renrcscnfation. ■Gladstone, Bright, Disraeli and Chamberlain opposed minority representation. He supported the second

Messrs. Sidey and Thomson support cd the measure. r (Left Sitting).