PREFERENCE VOTING CLOUDS ISSUE

Wanganui Chronicle, 4 October 1946, Page 5

PREFERENCE VOTING CLOUDS ISSUE

AUSTRALIAN ELECTIONS LABOUR LOSING SEATS

(Special from C. R. Recd. 5.5 p.m. Sydney, Oct. 3. The. tension which characterised the opening of the counting in the Federal election last Saturday night has increased rather than slackened as the long and tedious business of counting votes continues.

To a New Zealander it must seem incomprehehsible that so long after polling day so many seats should still be in doubt. Though poll clerks have been hard at work since 8 p.m. on Saturday, figures are mounting painfully slowly. Only 3,955(183... of the total of nearly 4,750,000 primary votes have been counted so far.

Even when the primary count is completed, probably during the weekend, the fate of several seats may not be decided.

In the Australian system of voting the elector numbers the candidates according to his preference, thus in an electorate where there are five candidates the valid ballot paper will be numbered from one to live. Where the conclusion of the primary count shews that no candidate has an absolute majority candidates who obviously are out of the running are el;mmated an J their second preferences are distributed among the leaders. COMPLICATED COUNT. This is continued through other preferences if necessary until an absolute majority is obtained. The position is complicated because in many electorates Liberal and Country Party candidates are both contesting against Labour.

Thus in the Riverina where Mr. Langry (Labour) has 18,212 votes, Mr. Robertson (Country Party), has 15,243, Lethbridge (Liberal), 6354, Gosling (Lang Labour) 2042 and Pow (Independent) 237. A victory tor Robertson is regarded as certain. This is because Liberal second preferences will largely go to the Country Party man.

Most doubtful seats are in this category, with predictions varying as prophets calculate the balance of preferences. This explains the odd fact that at no time since the commencement of counting have any two daily newspapers agreed on the result. Last Sunday’s papers gave Labour as ma as 49 seats, while to-day’s papers Z timate that the Government will scrape in with as few as 38. There are many anomalies. Thus in Reid, Mr. J. T. Lang has been hailed since the outset as a certain winner, despite the fact that he lags 5560 votes behind Morgan, Labour. Political correspondents aver that the bulk oh 14,467 second preference of votes cast for the Liberal candidate, Blaxland, will go to Lang, but this depends on which the average Liberal supporter regards as the lesser of two ev il s —Lang (Labour) or Official Labour. WILD GUESSING. This election, which I understand, is not extraordinary in Australia, has been marked by wild guessing on the part of radio commentators and sections of the Press. Last Saturday night we heard announcers proclaiming victory in certain electorates where fewer than 10,000 votes out of a total of 80,000 had been counted. There is no wonder that under such conditions it was hailed as an overwhelming triumph for Labour and an abysmal defeat for the Opposition. Before polling, Conservative Liberal authorities were hopeful of nothing more than that the Opposition would gain eight seats and would put up a light in 13 or more. What lias happener has borne out this estimate. Labour lias been returned with a working majority, but minus several valuable seats, and probably its deputy leader. On votes so far counted the difference between Labour and the main Opposition parties amounted to only 61 per cent, of the total.

The result may be even closer when postal and absentee votes finally reach the polling clerks.