"P.R." AND ALTERNATIVE VOTE

New Zealand Tablet, 18 April 1918, Page 18

"P.R." AND ALTERNATIVE VOTE

ELECTORAL SYSTEMS OF MINORITY REPRE- • ' \ SENTATION. In the passage of the Reform Bill through Parliament keen and bitter fights have taken place over the question of improving the method by which members are presently elected to the House of Commons (writes Geo. P. Quigley in the Glasgow Observer of February 9). Now it is openly admitted, and cannot be denied, that the present system is unjust and unfair, and does not and cannot result in a truly representative assembly. Yet the majority of the members, true, no doubt, to personal interests, even if false to the country, bitterly resists a reform which, while it would reflect more accurately the will of the electorate, might result in dismissal from political life and all that that connotes. H. G. Wells puts the position most aptly in his opening sentence in an article upholding P.R. in the Daily Chronicle of Wednesday last— an article which everyone should read and enjoywhen he says "British political life resists cleansing with all the vigor of a dirty little boy." It may be remembered that the Speaker's Conference on Electoral Reform, the recommendation? of which formed the basis of the present Reform Bill. unanimously accepted P.R. for the large cities and boroughs ; it also recommended, but by a majority only. the application of the Alternative Vote to elections in single member constituencies, when more than two candidates are nominated for the single seat. Minority Members. At present when such a contingency arises, the candidate highest on the poll is elected ; and it frequently happens that this person is the choice of but a minority of those voting in the election. The case of Mr. Mackinder in Camlachie is illustrative of this point. Two much more interesting cases, however, are on record. In Jarrow in 1907, Curran (Labor) was returned by a vote of 4698 in a total vote of 14,226, or just less than one-third of those voting. In Sheffield (Attercliffe) in 1909, Pointer (Labor) was returned by 3531 out of a total vote of 12,889, or just a little over one-fourth of those voting. Alternative Vote Explained. The Alternative Vote—the experience of which is confined to Australia—is designed to prevent the above. By this method (which resembles P.R. only in the method of marking the ballot paper) the elector puts the figure 1 opposite the name of his first choice, the figure 2 opposite his second preference, and so on. If any candidate has an absolute majority of first preferences he is declared elected. It. not, the candidate lowest on the poll drops out and his votes are transferred to the second preferences on his papers. This is continued until some candidate obtains the necessary majority. Let us take an illustration. In a three-cornered fight the poll results as follows: Jones (Unionist ... ... ... ... 5000 Brown (Labor) ... ... ... ... 4000 Smith (Liberal) ... ... ... ... 3000 Smith is dropped and his 3000 votes transferred. This is the result Transferred No. of "1" from Candidate. Votes. Smith's 3000. Result. Jones (Unionist) ... 5000 ... 500 ... 5500 Brown (Labor) ... 4000 ... 2000 ... 6000 (No preferences given beyond No. 1) ... Hence Brown (Labor) is declared elected. Now, while this method is an improvement in that it ensures that the elected candidate must have a majority supporting him, it must not for a moment be considered that this

change is going to make Parliament more representative. It is not but rather the reverse. So far from ' helping minorities and sections to obtain representation, it will absolutely shut them out from a chance that at present they hold. It is conceivable, for example, that in some of the fifteen Divisions into which Glasgow is now divided, a non-official Labor candidate backed by a section might succeed in being returned, if a sufficient number of candidates stood for election. With the Alternative Vote his chance is hopeless. The Alternative Vote is merely another, though improved, form of the second ballot, and its ugly feature in common with the latter is that it begets bargaining between parties and party caucuses, usually with a view to kill the most progressive party. This is the experience in Australia, the only place where it is iii operation. In that country it has been used as an engine directed against the aspirations of the Labor Party, though fortunately for the latter the opportunities for its full use have been very few. In Victoria, in 1911, only in five out of sixty-five elections was an actual transfer of votes necessary. Analysis and Conclusions. To show how far from an accurate and fair result the Alternative Vote may lead, I give below a summary of the results of all the three-cornered bye-elections from the General Election, December, 1910, until February, 1914, and the probable result had the Alternative Vote been operating in these contests: Seats with Alter. Vote.

To sum up. By this method—(l) Minorities get no representation. (2) The smallest of three parties in a constituency never has a chance of ret urn in c its man. (3) The party that has the most definite and militant creed runs special dangers. (-1) The person returned usually owes his election to manoeuvring, and is not independent in his ion. (5) Tho final result in the country is further to misrepresent political opinion. The root of the whole evil in this matter of representation is the retention of the single member constituency. Herein there is only one person to be elected. That person can only represent one party, and that party the majority party. Superiority of "P.R." By the method of P.lt. single member constituencies are grouped into areas returning 3, 4, or more persons. In this case it is not necessary for a candidate to obtain a majority of votes cast in order to be successful (though of course a candidate obtaining, a majority of votes cast is assured of success). All that is wanted is a proportion or quota, as it is called. In a five-member constituency (such as we suggest for Glasgow) the quota would only amount to one-sixth of the votes cast. Drawing his support from the larger area, and only requiring to make up his quota, the candidate of a section stands a good chance of success. In this way all sections of the electorate get representation in proportion to their voting strength at the polls—and that in brief is Proportional Representation. Recent Gyrations. Both P.R. and the Alternative Vote have had exciting times in Parliament during the progress of the Bill. To the outsider the insertion, rejection, and reinsertion of each of them in" turn ,has been amazing

and bewildering. From the outset the Coalition Caucus was bitterly; opposed to P.P. Yet in Committee in July, 1917, P.P. was dropped only by the narrow majority of 30 in a very heavy vote. On the eve of the division its chances seemed rosy; then the Unionist machine threw in its weight against. At this stage the Alternative Vote was accepted by a majority of one. On report, P.R. was again pressed by its friends. This time the Liberal machine showed an inclination to join the others, and the adverse majority increased. The Bill went to the Lords. They rejected the A.V. and re-inserted P.R., adopting a complete scheme, however, by a majority exceeding three to one. The Commons then re-inserted the Alternative Vote by a majority of eight, and rejected the complete scheme of P.R. by two to one. This time the Liberal Caucus was dead against, and all the machines were in loyal co-operation. Mr. Asquith and Mr. Adamson, representing Liberals and Labor, while opposing the complete scheme, suggested compromise on the lines of the Speaker's Conference. They and their following will support this, and to-day that is the hope outstanding. On Monday night last the Lords again re-inserted P.lt.—-the original scheme—by 88 to 35, and at the same time rejected the Alternative Vote by 66 to 29. Next day (Tuesday) the Commons decided finally by again rejecting P.R. The machine is so bitter that it will not allow the trial of a modified scheme, for that, it is felt; will lead to a demand for its extension when fair-minded people see it in operation. The cheering thing is that P.R. is winning, though engaged in an uphill fight against heavy odds. At Nottingham two weeks ago the Labor world unanimously passed a resolution in its favor—though the Labor Party in Parliament, pay little heed to that. [This incidentally is one of the reasons that Labor in the country is not particularly in love with its Party in the Commons.] One thing is certain, the final result is never for a minute in doubt. P.R. will triumph—caucus or no caucus. We fall back on the will of the people, and this must and shall prevail.

£ . o ~ . o bjO d -6-B P CTS rrt -2 P cti cti Pari y. Votes Cast. Seats ci won. Seats o ZJ Zj ci P o Lib.-L. Combini Against Un.-L Combin +-> 2 c3 br; <3 Liberal ... 87,000 9 G 14 1 Unionist ... 76.156 5 5 0 13 Labor d ; m p... 45,273 ~ d C7 0 c 3 S’ ro fi w Ct* 00 _ Cl0 O O - a LO 0 Or §d£ 1 — CO c Seats CT. C7l o actually won. Seats o ClW according P.R. to Lib.-Lab. Combination Against Un. t—» Un.-Lab. o Combination Against Lib.