THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL BILL.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume LXV, Issue 11784, 22 September 1913, Page 2

THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL BILL.

PROPORTIONAL REPEESTNTATION.

(Parliamentary Reporter), WELLINGTON, Saturday. The fundamental principles of the Government's Bill which aims at reform s. of the Legislative Council are election \by large constituencies, and proportion- | al representation. I With this in mind, it will be interest- ' ing to note the result of the investiga- ; tions of the chief electoral officer (Mr ;F. W. Mansfield), who was sent to | Tasmania in January last to enquire i into the working of the system of proI portional representation in operation in i that State. Mr Mansiieid was present ,at the count of the votes for Dennison, and later witnessed the Franklin count. "Tho process of the count under the Tasinanian system," says the chief electoral officer in his report, "is complicated and tedious, but I followed it without much difficulty, and obtained a good insight into the method, and brought back sufficient data to enable me to demonstrate the system here. '' Tasmania is divided into live electorates, each returning six members, and at the election in 1912 the Liberals returned 16 and the Opposition (Labour) 14 members. A deadlock was followed, by a dissolution, but the January election witnessed by Mr Mansfield brought about precisely the same result—l 6as against 14. The smallness of the Liberal majority is attributed to the fact that the districts each return an even and not an odd number of members. The electoral officers in Tasmania expressed the opinion that by adopting the seven members constituency, therefore, the larger party would probably have obtained a majority of five members, although only entitled, according to the actual strength of the parties, to a majority of 3.2 members. Mr Mansfield comments thus: "Judging from comments in the press, and from the remarks of informed persons, there is a good deal of dissatisfaction with the system of elections as at present constituted, and it was indicated [ that an effort would probably be mado Ito have the law amended. lam under the impression that some, while not wishing to see the fundamental principle of the proportional method interfered with, would welcome some modification of the present method by which the results of the pou are arrived at, while others would support a change back to single-member constituencies, with preferential voting, so as to secure the return of a candidate by an absolute majority. " Mr Mansfield notes that the way results are obtained is little understood by many of the electors. "And," he adds, "this is not surprising. The process is bewildering to- most people. , That it works out with almost mathemat- ! ical accuracy as far as the strength of ' the parties in the electorate is concerned, is quite apparent; but the transfer of the remoter preferences is apt to produce most unexpected changes at the last moment. It may sometimes happ- j en that preferences three or four times removed will finally decide the election of a candidate—a complex phase of the system that is not fully realized by the average voter when marking his ballot paper. The delay in arriving at tho ■ final results of the poll, which may extend over a period of a week, is a i auso of much dissatisfaction." The Tasmauian Premier (Hon. Mr Solomon) expressed the opinion to Mr Mansfield that single member constituencies with the preferential vote would bo found to give greater satisfaction to New Zealand than the proportional system. Under the present electoral law in Tasmania it is not practicable to carry out by-elections under their proportional system. The. wholo electorate is polled for the return of a member, and if there are more than two cancudstes standing, tho preferential method of voting is applied so as to ensure the return of a candidate with au absolute majority. Generally speaking, says Mr Mansfield, the objections to tho Hare-Clarke system were not against proportional representation, but rather against' the complex method by which the results of the election were arrived at. "Tho question of substituting the party list system of proportional representation "for the transferable vote is engaging serious attention in Tasmania," adds Mr Mansfield. "The system has much to recommend it. On the ballot paper the candidates are arranged in lists according to party, and tho elector votes for as many candidates as there are seats to be filled —not by numbering the candidates in the order of his preference, but by giving a vote to each of them. Instead of having to decide upon his various preferences, the ; elector may vote straight out for his party by giving a vote to each candidate on the list (up to one number of candidates to bo elected), just as he may do at an ordinary municipal election. He is not, however, prevented from voting for any candidates, irrespective of parties. There being no 'preferences' to deal with, the duty of the returning officer in ascertaining the result of the poll is exceedingly simple. He ascertains the number of votes secured by each candidate, as well as the total of all votes obtained by all the candidates in each party, ami apportions the number of seats to each party accordingly, selecting the particular candidates who are highest on the list. In the event or. a seat becoming vacant through the death or resignation of a member, the next highest candidate in the party's list at tho general election is selected. Thus, tho proportional strength of the parties in the House remain undisturbed, and the trouble and expense of a by-election are obviated. It will be seen that the party list system subordinates the candidate to the party," adds Mr Mansfield, "while the use of transferable vote subordinates the party list does away entirely with the complicated and tedious method of arriving at results, such as we have with the transferable vote, while it is claimed for it that it' returns each party in exact proportion to their respective strengths. The objections to the partylist system do not appear to be very serious, 'and, ii it is intended to adopt proportional representation in some form or other, this system should be given careful consideration. " Another point: "Regarding the application of proportional representati n to New Zealand," observes Mr Mans(Continued on Page y.)

field, "there would be no difficulty so far as the Parliamentary poll was concerned; but I see very great difficulties in the way oi carrying out a poll under the proportional system (whicu requires largo constituencies) simultaneously I with the licensing and national prohibi- ! tion polls. The whole question wouiu become exceedingly complicated, and even if the' process could be made at all workable, tho risk of irregularities in connection with tho conduct of the polls would be very-great. . . . If it is decided to retain single-member constituencies in part or throughout the whole of tho Dominion, I think the use of the preferential vote (where there are more than two candidates) would prove much more satisfactory than the second ballot. The method provides, in reality, for first and second ballots being conducted at one operation, and its adoption would not involve any disturbance in present electoral arrangements." Three Australian States, viz., Queensland, Victoria and Western Australia —have adopted preferential voting with single-member constituencies,and the system, so far, is said to have given satisfaction.