THE WAIPUKURAU PRESS TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 26, 1935. ELECTORAL ANOMALIES.

Waipukurau Press, Volume XXX, Issue 275, 26 November 1935, Page 4

THE WAIPUKURAU PRESS TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 26, 1935. ELECTORAL ANOMALIES.

The pleasure'with which foreign nations are welcoming the return 'of the National Government in Britain is a tribute to British stability in an unstable world. And coming, as it does, from both Germany and Italy, it may be a grudging tribute, also, to parliamentary government. In that case, however, a word of caution may be sounded,” comments the 11 Christchurch Star” (a newspaper that strongly supports the New Zealand National Government, but believes in an equitable system of representation). “The present returns of votes cast to seats won are as follows: Government, 11,616,237 vote, 421 seats; Opposition, 10,037,589 votes, 180 seats. The Government remains a majority Government, thanks to the adherence of National Liberal and National Labour members, whose votes, turned over, would reverse the aggregate figures, but the non-represen-tation of considerable groups of electors has a regrettable implication. The Government, in brief, cannot speak with the full authority of the nation, or with the secret strength that rests on the knowledge that its mandate is drawn from the widest area of consent. It is a strange anomaly that the Mother of Parliaments, which has given Ireland proportional representation and applied that system also to the election of the representatives of the universities, should have retained an imperfect system for itself, under which political landslides often occur. This election, in fact, is a landslide, which not even the ardent supporters of the Government had expected. The net result ( on this occasion is majority rule, but there is always the danger of a stampede from bad to worse, for electors who may be discontented with the government of the day have no course open to them, if they vote at all, save that of voting for an opposing party for whose programme they may have no positive approval.” The “Star” points out that “there have been a few rather startling changes in the personnel of the House of Commons, but these have been due in virtually very case to parochial or personal reasons. The Labour attack on Mr. Ramsay MacDonald, for instance, had been increasing in bitterness of late and his opponents stirred up the agitation against him in his constituency for more than two years. Sir Herbert Samuel owes his defeat solely to the presence of a Labour candidate in the field and the incident has no special significance. Under a more logical system of representation such leaders as these would be sure of their seats and the effect of all purely local jealousies and rivalries would disappear. Actually the new House of Commons is anything but an exact picture of the political opinions of the nation and the Conservatives have been given representation greatly in excess of their voting strength, while both Labour and Liberals are under-represented. However, the country seems to be content with the doctrine that a government with a strong party in the House is more to be desired than a just representation of opinions.”