The Dominion. TUESDAY, DECEMBER 19, 1911. ELECTORAL REFORM.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1315, 19 December 1911, Page 4

The Dominion. TUESDAY, DECEMBER 19, 1911. ELECTORAL REFORM.

Some of our contemporaries are already busy finding in the statistics of the election a proof of the need for some system of proportional representation. Almost every Parliamentary election that takes place supplies arguments for the need of improved electoral methods; but we are afraid that nearly all the comments we have read on this point in the last few days show a want of knowledge and a neglect to take account of all the essential facts. Hero and there, it must he said, we have seen soinn consciously uncnmlitl handling of the figures. Now, in the new Parliamentary epoch that has begun, there will be no room for the ♦ rickn thafc were do is.fy to play in the age now happily caded. Tor-

hajis it was merely the force of habit that led our evening contemporary, for example, to jjlay tricks with the figures in one of its articles on Saturday. The habit must, and doubtless will, be got rid of; for the time has begun for the honest fighting out of debatable issues. On Saturday we showed that in order to estimate correctly the relative strengths of "Liberalism" and Reform sentiment in the country, it is essential to consider only those contests in which the "Liberal" and lieform candidates actually met. There were only 51 such contests, and the votes, subject to corrections that will not alter the general ratio, were as follow:—Opposition 1G5,88U, Government 117,810. This ratio was nuite closely reproduced in the ratio of the number of Opposition candidates to the number of Government candidates actually elected in the whole contest, namely, 117 to 32. Neither party, therefore, has much right to complain. Our "Liberal' , friends make the Government's figures show to much better advantage by counting up all the. votes cast for Government nominees in every seat, thus implying that there does not exist a single Opposition voter in any of the seats in which no Opposition candidate went to the' poll. This, of course, is dishonest. ]n 1908 the Opposition candidates secured about 115,000 votes, or not much more than ,a quarter of the total of votes recorded (■128,648). If no further facts were looked for, it would appear that, the Opposition, which secured 25 seats, won six more scats than they were entitled to. But there are other important facts that must be noted. The Opposition then contested only -17 seats. . AVerc there no Opposition votes in the otlvi- 29 seats) Of course there were, although the absence of Opposition candidates left these votes without any means of being registered. In 1908 the Opposition were not credited, owing tr there being no Opposition candidate, with a single vote in Auckland West, for example. This year a candidate was put up there, who won the seat and showed that there were over 4000 Opposition voters in the electorate. The same is true of Dunedin Central and of Oamaru. And heavy Opposition votes were cast in the following electorates which in 190S the Ministerialist statisticians treated as -barren of Opposition voters: Auckland Central, Grey Lynn, Auckland East, Motucka, Chnstchurch North Oamaru, Dunedin West, Invercargill, Awarua, and others. From the plain fact that all these and other seats would in 190S, had Opposition candidates been contesting them have shown the presence of a vast number of Opposition voters (theyactually did, in many cases, hst m™ 7° concl,,sion s must follow: (i; Ihat a great number of Reform votes, owing to the fact that Reform candidates were not there to receive them, have this vcar been credited to "Liberals," to Labour candidates and to Independents:"?' that accordingly, in order to estimate the relative strength of tin Liberals' and the Reformers, we must consider only those scats that enable them to bo compared. We must not, therefore, credit the Opposition, against the Government, with its second ballot totals in such seats W n- ell * ,ngt S. n Suburbe - Ra E lan - * v elhngton East; nor must wo credit the Government, against the Opposition, with is votes in- Wes land, Napier, Bailor Thames, and many Other seats. The putting up thiyear of Opposition candidates i< sea s uncontested by the Opposition in 1008 has shown, as wo have seen the. fallacy of the Ministerialist statisticians in 1908; and it also shows the fallacy of looking at this year's totals without considering how thev arc made up. So much for the honestly mistaken or wilfully uncandid attempts that have been made on behalf of the bovoriiDicnfc party to construct a supposed "proof by statistics" of the continued affection of the coun-)-y for AVardism. But tlic facts we lave ueen_ discussing point also to tlic necessity for great care in approaching the question of proportional representation. The fact that one party_ polls 10 voles to another party s nine may mean any one of several tilings, and is iuif sufficient by itself to mean anything definite. Llie whole of the fc.cts must lie examiucd. There is certainly room in i\ew Zealand for some improved method of voting, in order that the smaller parties, like Labour, may bo given a f;iir opportunity to secure representation in Parliament. Fn Grev Lynn. Ofaki, and AVan.canui, tlm Labour candidates were liittorly opposed by the "Liberals,'' who strove to keep the embryo Labour party fr.bm appearing at all, and \rnru helnnt! in only by the Rnform vote, Ilad the Beiorru votcrj not i

1)0011 true to their conviction that Wardism must lie destroyed, where would Labour be? The "general results of the elections present many anomalies. For example, on the voting the Government was entitled to one of the Wellington seats, but it holds none of them; in Christchurch the Kcform party has suffered in th" tame way. Upon one thing most of us arc agreed, that the second ballot system, with its interval for bargainings that may ho against the. public interest, is the reverse of an improvement upon the old system ot "top man in." The whole "question of electoral reform is one that must lie dealt with fully and fairly in the near future, and the facts about the figures of the elections that we have given here should persuade the members of the new Parliament that (he question is not one for settlement in an off-hand and superficial fashion.