P.R. AND THE COUNCIL.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 16417, 4 May 1921, Page 7

P.R. AND THE COUNCIL.

VIEWS OF ELECTED CANDIDATES. A VARIETY OF OPINIONS. During the City Council election campaign the “Star”' invited the views of candidates on a series of questions. One of the questions was: Will you support the retention of the system of proportional representation in municipal elections? The question was replied to by all the successful candidates, whose replies we reproduce as follows : Dr Thacker (Mayor)— I support (he retention of P.R. for municipal elections, and all other elections. Mr H. Hunter (Labour)—Yes, I will fight to retain the system of P.R.. because I believe it to he sound in principle. and the most practical in its operation towards securing a reflex of the views of the community in the council chamber. Mr H. T. Armstrong (Labour) —Yes, I will support the retention of P.R., because it is the only electoral system under which we arc assured the right of majority rule, and at the same time it gives every section of the community representation according to its numbers. Mrs E. R. M/Oombs (Labour) —Yes, because (a) P.R. gives each elector an effective vote and voice in the affairs of the city ; (b) gives the electors a wider freedom in the choice of representatives ; (c) ensures to parties representation by their ablest and trusted members; (d) secures that the majority of the electors shall rule, and all considerable minorities shall bo heard on questions concerning the common weal. Mr D. G. Sullivan (Labour) —Decidedly. T am most anxious that the system he retained. Mr F. R. Cooke (Labour) —I assisted in procuring for Christchurch this just method of electing the people’s representatives. Rev J. K. Archer (Labour) —I will vote for the continuance of P R. It gives predominance to majorities,. but also proper representation to minorities. Mr A. Williams (Citizens) —T am entirely opposed to it under existing conditions, but would not object if the city were divided into two wards (north and south) Mr H F. Herbert (Independent)— Yes. now that it is in vogue give it a fair trial. Mr W. 11. Winsor (Independent)—lf the result of this election pans out as it did in 1917, when the sixteen candidates who secured seats (put of the thirty) were the first sixteen in the first count receiving (ir«t preference votes, then 7 should oppose the system of further counts, on the grounds that it fills no useful purpose in determining the result, merely prolonging the .Mr (’. W. FTervey (Independent)—Tf elected I will vote against the retention of P.U., so far as municipal elections are concerned. Mr A. M’Kellar (Citizens) T am opposed to the P.R. system of voting for municipal elections. The system is too complicated for many voters to understand, and thus leads to a high percentage of informal votes. It tends to consolidate the party system in the council, which is not in the best interests of municipal administration. The system in vogue for Parliamentary elections, being familiar 10 everybody, is the system best suited for municipal elections and is the system adopted by practically all the towns in New Zealand. except Christchurch. Mr E. H. Andrews (Citizens) Two years ago I agreed to support a further trial of the P.R. system. I recognised its drawbacks, and never looked upon it as the perfect system claimed by its ardent supporters: and 1 must say the more I learn of it the less 1 like it. At the Same time l recognise that it has its merits, the chief to my mind, being the elimination of the ward system. 1 prefer a straight out vote over the whole city, the same method as is adopted for the Mayoralty, but rather than return to the ward system. 1 would vote for the retention of P.R. Mr J. A. Flesher (Citizens)—No. The present system is not suitable for the election of sixteen representatives by a single constituency. Mr J. R. Brunt (Citizens) —The proof of the pudding is in the eating. I think that after the result of the present contest the council will revert to the old system, but have one Greater Christchurch poll—not in wards. Air C. I*. Agar (Citizens) —No. Mr A. Manhire (Citizens)—No, not for municipal elections where a council of sixteen has to be elected. as voters under P.R. have only a. first, second and third preference vote that counts materially, while the sixteen councillors are of equal importance to nil electors.