REVOKED.

Press, Volume LV, Issue 16432, 28 January 1919, Page 7

REVOKED.

CITY COUNCIL'S ELECTORAL SYSTEM.

PROPORTIONAL R EPRESEN TAT lON ABO LISH ED. In view of the big fight in the City Council over the proportionnl representation question during tho evening of Monday, Derembcr :23 rd. ami tho early hours of tho following morning, when the advocates of the system fought a stonowall, considerable interest was manifested in last night's .sitting of tho Council, when tho resolution rescinding proportional representation came tip for confirmation. Every member of t!ie Council, except Cr. Nicholls. was present, and tho public gallery was packed, whilst several privileged visitors were accommodated within the barrior. When tho Council was asked to confirm tho minutes of tho special meeting passing tho resolution, Cr. llurgoyne moved that they bo road that day sis months. " | Councillors smiled, but no one seconded tho motion, and the minutes were confirmed without further dissent. A letter was read from the Christchurch branch of the Amalgamated Socicty of Engineers, protesting against the proposed abolition of proportional representation. "I move that it bo received and approvod," said Cr. Howard. Other councillors laughed. '"That the lotter be roceivcd,'' said the Mayor (Mr H. Holland) ignoring the latter part of Cr. Howard's motion when ho put tho motion to Uie meeting. Tho motion, as amended by tho Mayor, was carried. A DEPUTATION. A big deputation, appointed by the advocates of proportional representa--1 tion, waited upon the Council. Mr H. D. Acland said he and the other members of the deputation wero present as the result of a public meeting, which passed resolutions protesting against the rescinding by tho Council of proportional representation, requesting the Council to submit the matter first to the doctors at tho elections in April noxt, and regretting that tho Mayor and othor members of the Council had not seen fit to call a public meeting to explain their action. Mr , Aclnnd said tho Council had received no mandate from the electors to alter the system of election, and. moreover, ' they would outrage tho feelings of a 1 largo number of councillors. Jfc seem- }

©d to him very necessary, in the intei ests of all tho people, that both loadin parties should be represented on th Souncil. He urged the Council t elay altering tho law. If theM altei ed the law, it would mean that te electors wore taking this upon then selves. He was expressing no opinio upon the merits or demerits of propoi tional representation, but ho was t opinion that the Council's propose action would he an illegal step. Dr. Chilton said the only objection h could find to proportional representc tion was that it was a cumbersome an complicated system. He had not foun this so in. his experience, and Mr Ho{ ben, the returning officer at the las Council election, had assured him tha ho could find no faults with it fror tho point of view of complications. ] the Council substituted tho first pas the post _ system for proportional r< presentation, it might mean that th new Council would be composed of th members of one party only. If the liad not this they might baVe tho wari systom, wliiefi was soundly condemnei on account of its fostering "of parochial ism. Tho deputation then withdrew. A PRELIMINARY SKIRMISH. Other business occupied the attontior 0 ™ Council until 9.13 p.m., wher ? r ' Flesher rose to move the confirmee resolution. Before he could speak; Taylor jumped up and, addressing the Mayor, said: "Before you put that 1 .have a motion—tho point might well be cleared up by this Council before we proceed with certain business—'That in the event of the proportional representation system of voting being rescinded, this Council is of opinion that tho necessary system of election should he conducted under the ward system.' OY. laylor askod for the Council's permission to move that motion before the proportional representation discussion came on, because it might affect the I°}™s /.councillors knew the Council system S ° mg back tho ward *Ja v eply Cr - Sullivan, the Mayor said he would gut the motion to the Si' le ?^ er objected. He hJo ™ Ta y'. or CO »W not move rJ?W°b 10n t evening. Every- couneven^nS I a l Comil ?« on t]mt firo nf i, kad been side-tracked five weeks ago, and he claimed hie right . to movo his motion. fa ' aaidCr V th i er discussi<m . tho Mayor *it«>■»''»nrSc' ? ullivun .<*? the Mayor): You esBIT" that if »J V A hip: Tl "" hM *.5" r '-§L Tan sa,d h® would formallv we voices. A division was called fnr i ? nifw oSU,t f- d in a tie - the Mayor giv- ' whiA, J*' VOto a ? ni "st the motion, Which was consequently lost. The divil sion list was as follows:— i "P*vO ° S -i &'* rs - Taylor. Hayward S'bSo™' Noes (8> : Crs. Ell. Why, Beauland r,cshCT - S th *V«'er. nmit b. BO XrS ° P "" < " 1 ' "PI"""' or *»Wi, S,re,,il '> th<s P»Mi= L? gI > e C3C prcvssion. Thi Yr rship : -\ ofc in this Chamber. "» W each' ° €r s P eaker s fflolion.- 19 P " m - Cr " F,esher moved his ; Cr R Ffp^if SHEI ! ,S - ARGUMENTS said since thov had 1 sidernhf b -° for -*' ther ° haefbeen ™n- 1 not a K !0 " He bad ! which fnd nuLj'V a,d • nn . v thing ! ProDortinnni 1,16 9 onvic tion that ' Tl* ? oloction of sixteen mem- &. 0 T 6111 "< (Jeotion should te ! tors. * ?> n "i H ishes of the olo?- ■ Board were, l °/,i e , Harbour \ tinnoi npre elected under Dronnr- ■ PWt under Sen the lon 'l i nnd th ° Sroater ] •""no applied tn +l w . system - Tho table i th ® , ri °spital and Chari- 1 %<s&,rss look nfLJ fe :«eure the best man to Sed -! y s mto , r ? sts - He submitted that it was this latter, and this he contended should bo done irreWf° >, an ?ii P i arty u° r 01 '8 an 'sation. £ne test should be the man's fitness wery voter should have freedom of choicowith tho right to vote fo evcry Member. To eveiy intelligent voter! , every member of a Citv Council Ha-- d< Board, or Hospital Board should be ! DI oi e q ual importance. This was not so ! n aor proportional renresentatioa. An idi

elector c 9 uld only vote for on© man tnough sixteen were required to complete the Council. It was true he had a transferable vote, but a transferable voto lost its value every time after it was used. It was conceded that this system was unsuitable for a constituency requiring the ejection of sixteen members. Tiie City Council was esSn tinliy an administrative body. The Council had certain powers of lecisla tion, but on limited lines. The svs" tern of proportional representation was not suited to a body over 99 per cent or wuose work was administrative. Ilie system Dr. Chilton wanted wan +i lO * reach party system, a list ines^etive of party, comprising the .best men not the proportional representation sv'stem at all. He (Mr l'ieshcr) thought the party list system the best to so in Christchurch. Under this n elector had freedom of choice and eveJv \ote possessed full valuo. With thp cxcopuon of dominant outstanding nor soi.alit.es, no man stood a chance of election under proportional represent lion unless he submitted to the party machine 'lhe party list system ob- \ 1.1 ted the necessity for by-elections, the highest unsuccessful candidate on th« list at the general election filling any vacancy His objections to proportional representation were that it engendered party feeling that it was unsuitable lor municipal elections, it bewildered the voter, and limited his freedom of action, and it was claimed that to secure satisfactory results from it it should bo worki:d with odd numbers. 1 lie City Council was onlv beina used for one purpose, and that a political one. Jle understood a majority of the councillors supported a reversion to the,ward system. If the ward system were reverted to, the electors would have iewer candidates to select from and would be less liable to become conl fused. He denied that there was anv conspiracy upon the part of those supporting the revocation order. Every man was acting for himself, so f. he (Cr. Flesher) knew. They would nave brought the question up two yeais ago, only they thought it would mean reverting to the ward system, and the holding of another election. P'r. Loasbv seconded the motion, and said that he opposed the system bo:ause it was cumbersome. They were accuser! of revoking the system without any mandate; but they never had a mandate to introduco it. There was a pause, and the Mayor was about to put the question, when Cr. Sullivan rose. The Mayor announced that he had reeoived a telegram from Cr. Nicholls, stating that ho had bean hold up owing to flooded rivers. Cr. Sullivan said that the Mayor had stated that he "would rather support proportional representation than revert to tho ward system, and there were about e.oven councillors who, in the a vent of tho system being revoked, wero prepared to support a reversion to the ward system. Cr. Flesher and his . colleagues, in acting as thoy were doing, ; without the authority of the commun- | ity, forgot that thoy were delegates re- , presenting their constituents, and had . no personal.rights in tho matter. They wore defying the pooplo they represent- . Ed, and they were defying British constitutional methods. , At 10.40 the supper adjournment was r taken. A COMPROMISE SUGGESTED. On resuming at 11.10 p.m., Cr. Taylor asked if it would not be possible for representatives of tho parties to confer and come to an understanding, say on the lines of tho next election being held under the proportional representation system, the incoming Council to take ; steps to have the law amended to provido for the division of the city into two wards, each returning eight members. Tho Mayor: Any chance of a eonferi ence ? Cr. Flesher: What's tho use? Cr. Taylor thought some, effort should be mado., Cr. Loasbv: Why don't you have a conference and come to on'r opinion— that's just as sensible as your suggestion. The debate was resumed. Cr. Peek said that he was absolutely opposed to parties in the Council; they were not. in tho interests of good administration. and had caused all the friction and humbug in the Council for tho past two years. Ciy Taylor said that he knew of nothing that had passed through more deliberate stages than the adoption of proportional representation, and the I onus was on tho other party to show why the Council should go back onSt. Cr. Ell Baid that when proportional representation was proposed he had his : doubts about the wisdom of it; ho had no doubt- about it now. He had no intention of voting for it again, either ] for municipal or Parliamentary elec- i tions. ■] The debate was continued by Crs. i Hay ward, Wolls, McKellar, Herbert, , Beanland, tho Mayor. Crs. Howard, ana Climie. ] At 1.20 a.m. Cr. Flesher replied. At 1.32 a.m. the division was taken, tho motion being agreed to by 9 votes ; t°7. ... : c The division list is as follows.— Aves —The Mayor. Crs. EH, Loasby, Peek, Beanland, Clitnie ; McKellar, Flesher, Williams. Noes-r-Crs, Taylor Hayward, Sullivan, Herbert. Wells, Howard, Burgoyne. Cr. W. Nicholls. was absent from the meeting. Tho Council rose at 1.35 a.m.