PARTY AND THE SECOND BALLOT.

Press, Volume XLIX, Issue 14833, 26 November 1913, Page 5

PARTY AND THE SECOND BALLOT.

AN OPEX LETTER TO THE PRIME MINISTER.

"With a full sense of responsibility" — Sir Joseph Ward. j Dear Mr Ma&sev.—No one who gives any thought to political questions can fail to notice the remarkable contrast between the amazing progress made in science and the utter futility of all attempts to improve political institutions and methods, as shown, for example, in the fact that no English-spiking country has yet succeeded in constructing a Second Chamber reasonably adapted for its purpose, or in devising a system of popular representation that does justice to minorities. Tho explanation of this failure is probably to bo found in our absurd system of party government, for esperienco seems to show that parties are incapable of contemplating such reforms from any other point of view than that of their own immediate party advantage. There could bo no better illustration of this than is afforded by our brief trial of the second ballot. The* introduction of this "reform" was almost as great a surprise as tho restoration by Mr Seddon, a few years before, of single-member constituencies in the four cities of Auckland, "Wellington, Christchurch, and Dunedin. It is safe to say that neither Mr Seddon nor Sir Joseph Ward received (or deserved) credit for being actuated by any other motive than a desire to .servo their own immediate party purposes. In view of Sir Joseph's attitude with regard to your proposal to repeal his Second Ballot Act. it is interesting to recall the circumstances that led him to introduce this "reform." As you will no doubt recollect, the Act was passed in the session of 1908, on the evo of a general election, the first of which Sir Joseph had control as Prime Minister. He was well aware that even before the election of 1905—Mr Seddon's last —thero woro indications that tho leadej-s of the Labour Party were coming to the conclusion that nothing further was to be gained by identification with the Liberal Party. They had never professed much confidence in Sir Joseph, and during his premiership he had not shown uny anxiety to carry on the Seddon tradition by endeavouring to convince the malcontents that their real interest lay in maintaining the alliance between the Labour Party and the Liberal Party; on the contrary, he had taken eomo pains, in speeches he made in Auckland and Onehunga before tho election, to intimate to those who under the Seddon regime had constituted the extreme Left of tho Liberal Party that instead of regretting their defection he rather welcomed it. Ho evidently thought this was the best card to play with a view to the election, and ho he made his appeal to what he described as "the great Progressive Moderate Party" by doing his best to dissociate bimse-lf and the Liberal Party from the'(revolutionary) (Socialists. This, then, wne tho position when Sir Joseph sprung a surprise upon Parliament and tho country by the introduction, of his Second Ballot. What was his object P To remove some of the admitted defects of our absurdly imperfect system of (misrepresentation ? Nothing so unworthy of a party leader! The object was simply to euchre the hostile Labour Party at the ensuing general election; but, as everybody knows, it was himsolf that was euchred, and in trying to account for his defeat at last election he laid great stress unon the effect of the Second Hallot! Indeed, it was generally expect ed that in view of its effect on the election of-1908 .he. would get the ! Act repealed before another election; bnt he evidently wasn't game to admit his mistake so soon! You may remember how Mr E. G. Allen, one of his,most obedient servants, on being defeated at tho second ballot in 1908, bewailed his fato in being deprived of the pleasure of helping to Topeal the Act which he had helped to pass? * What is Sir Joseph's attitude now? Ho and the rabblo of "Liberals," Radicals, and Socialists that constitute his party are threatening to stonewall your Bill abolishing the Second Ballot! Indeed, stonewalling seems to be Sir Joseph's one idea of the function of an Opposition, and of course he always carries it on "with a full sense of responsibility," ne he does everything. Ho is, of course, clever enough fo devise some excuse every time, and his pretext for opposing the. abolition of a. system which he would in all probability have abolished himself had he remained in office, is that your Bill makes no provision for .substituting some othor reform such as proportional representation ! And this .from one who,, during nearly twenty years of office made no effort to effect any such reform! His real object is; of course, something quite different. His new-found allies of the Labour Party are convinced that, if 'they could only get proportional representation, they would have no difficulty in securing the control of tho Government of New Zealand; and thus we find that the same "statesman" -who. In 1!K)8. apponled to the great Progressive Moderate Party, and introduced the .second ballot for the purpose of dishing the Labour Party, is now doing hfs best to compel you to substitute proportional representation, because he thinks it will help thatiparty and himself! And this, forsooth, is Liberalism, find anyone who refuses to follow this Liberal leader and •welcome Mr Webb, tho revolutionary Socialist as an .ally, is a Conservative! Whore is now that "great Progressive Moderate Party?" Tt is supporting the "Tory" Government. Bnt where is the "Liberal" loader who appealed to it in 1908? To whom is he now looking for support?— Yours, truly, T. MACCREGOR. I>itnedin. November 19th. 1913.