THE ELECTORAL BILL.

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1916, 26 November 1913, Page 4

THE ELECTORAL BILL.

HOSTILE AMENDMENT MOVED. PREFERENTIAL VOTINO. The Legislative Amendment Bill camo up for consideration of report 'from Committee at ii p.m. Sir Joseph Ward, moved, by woy of amendment, that the Bill be recommitted, for tlie purpose of inserting a now clause, providing for the establishment of preferential voting. The reason why lie was moving to insiirt the clause was that the proposal to the same effect made by Mr. ltussell in Committee had been considered-by a' jaded House and rejected. lie was quite confident, lie said, that the country was against minority representation, and preferential voting would 'enable a majority to declare, its will in r. simple way on the day of -the election. It would not mean any extra expense such- as the second ballot system entailed, and it would avoid, also, the objectionable dolay between the two polls. It was truo that tho second-ballot system had, as the result of experience, been shown to havo serious faults, but lie thought the second ballot should be retained, unless something were substituted foif it.

Sir j. Ward's Ohansad Views. The Hon. W.' i , '.':'"jMasscj' said ho did not think it was'necessary to discuss, the proposal at-.any great length, for the siniplc'veastiil : ,that it had been discussed ad nauseum i'or the last few days. It was not accessary to repeat the old arguments with which they had unfortunately become very familial of late. And he was quite sure the Leader of the' Opposition thought this when ho moved lus amendment. He proceeded to quota from a speech mat(e : by...Sir Joseph Ward when ha was introducing the Second' Ballot Bill in 14108. The statement was to the e-ifect that (lie transferable-voto system had been found to work out unsatisfactorily ..in

Queensland. ■ There, aftor'a seventeen years' trial, th'o People's 1 Chamber, had asked for tlio repeal of thi? I 'system; and its retention was due to the refusal of the Second Chamber to agree to the repeal of it. Tho honourable gentleman had foisted tho obsolete, antiquated second-ballot system upon tho'country against, tho wish of many of his, followers, and it had been cursed ever since by bell, book, and candle. The present Government bad no intention of putting anything in tho place of the second ballot this session, nor had it ever been promised as part of the Government's policy that a substitute would be provided. Now the honourable gentleman was seeking to foist upon the country a system which 'ho had formerly condemned. lie (Mr. Massey) would urge the House to pause before adopting.a second system on thp recommendation of tho honourable gentleman.

Mr. G. W„j ,;Kns'sell. (Avon) read through the Bill , which he had bad prepared during his term of office as Minister of Internal Affairs, and which he bad moved in Committee to add to the liill'as new clauses. It was not correct, he declared, .to say that the prefer-ential-voting proposal had been considered by the Comntittoo ad nauseam. Mo claimed, also, that the Government were irrevocably committed to provide for a substitute for the second ballet. This proposal would provide a means by which the Government could redeem their pledge. The Amendment Questioned. The Hon. W. H. Hcrries (Minister o[ Railways) raised the point (previously. raised by Mr. Fisher) that tho amendment was not in order, in view ol' the fact that an amendment relating t.-> the -single transferable vote 1 had already been negatived in Committee.The Speaker ruled that the amendment was in order according to tho Standing Oldcrs. He quoted tho decisions of previous Speakers in support of this ruling. vi - Mr. Ci. . ltussell. (Avon)- said that the Opposition were quito in favour of repealing tlie Second liaflot Act, but desired that a substitute should lie provided. The single transferable vote would bo a good substitute for tho Second Ballot, and lie could not understand why the Government- should hesitate to adopt it. Telling Reply by Mr. Fisher, The Hon. I l '. M. B. Fisher said that both parties were agreed that the Second Ballot should go, provided that a substitute were provided. (Hear hear.) As to what substitute should be provided it had been proved conclusively that proportional representation could not bo applied to .New Zealand so loni' as the country quota existed. Mr. Bay tie (Grey Lynn): Why no t abolish it? Mr. Fisher suggested that (he Opposition should put that question to its leader, who bad voted Hie previous night against a proposal to reduce it. The vote (-11 to 1-1) showed that it was impossible to touch the country quota. Mr. Fisher went on to criticise the system proposed ' in the amendment, saying that under it they would have tin; anomaly of one candidate getting I he advantage of ircond votes and other candidates not receiving the mne advantage. Those who were advocating I his system were really advocating "one man two votes." fie could not understand why they should allow a small proportion of the electors to have first one and then two votes, whilst other electors had only one. vole. It, might happen, according fo the list submitted in the memorandum quoted, that the lowest mail on tho Hat might bo the least acceptable of touv er.udi-

dates. _ ii the Second Ballot had its blemishes the cystetii of proportional representation also hud its blemishes. It was not workable in this country oil account of (lie country quota. Mr. i-islier quoted a speech by tfio late Mr. Gladstone in tavour of the'old system ol representation. Ho also quoted an extract m 'support of the same view iroin another "great Liberal." Mr. Russell's Consistency. A member: Who was he? ■•Mr. Kislier: The member for Avon, ill'. Kussell. (Laughter.) A member: hen was the speech made!' •)lr. Fisher; In 1896. •Mr. Payne: Oh, do not go back to the .l.''l(Hld! -Mr. Fisher: Does the honourable gentleman believe now that "consistency is ihe re luge of i eels' 'i (Laughter.) -Mr. Fisher went on to sav'that the i Leader 'of the Opposition and othermembers of his party had votpi againstprcvifstis Jiilis providing for absolute majorities, etc. When the present Leader ol the Opposition introduced the Second Ballot. Hill, sump of his colleagues, including the Hon. Mr. Millar, wore strongly opposed to it. It was brought don ii 011 trial, and it bad failed ignominious!}'.' if any Act- was "calculated to bring out nil that was worst in humanity, the. worst phases or 'bargaining; aniiuo'sit-y and malice, the -Second Ballot Act was the one i'o-r the purpose. (Hear, hear.) It was r.ot fair to ask any candidate to lace an election under the second ballot. A member: Why not? • Mr. Fisher: -Because it is wrong in essence and principle-. I will bo glad when tho repeal of the second-ballot-is safely upon the Statute Book.' Ho'had endeavoured to introduce a Second Ballot Repeal Bill, but thu motion had been blocked- for 8} hours. -Wiieu Sir Joseph Ward brought' down this Electoral- Hill, the Second Ballot-Bill, and another Bill in 1.008 there was no such obstruction. Mr. Witty (Uiccartou): Those Bills were printed. -Mr. Fisher: You never gave 1110 sin opportunity to haw my Bill printed, but you used tho forms of tho House in order to-enable a minority to dictate to 11 majority. Referring again to proportional representation, he said that tin* only way to make use of it was to apply it to tho cities, whore, there was no quota, Mr. Russell: Oil, preparing for your ou'n election Mr.' Fisher: I. have 110 need, to do that. 1 have- never lost an clcctiou. Opposition Critics. The Hon, 1). Buddo (Kaiapoi) supported the amend uent, and declared that the substitute for the second'ballot would be preferential voting. The Hon. A. T. Ngata (Eastern Maori) attacked the Prime Minister and the Minister of Marine in refernce to I their attitude 011 the subject of clectcral reform, . He accused the Prime i Minister of insincere grandiloquence,. and described the Minister of Marine as "a 1 political gra.'c-diggcr." He described 'at length the obstruction, .for which the I -present Government party was responsible in 1909, wh-ju it objected to voting an item of., JIOO for tho salary of the Financial -Adviser in London. Ho declared that the .Government in dealing with electoral, law,, was intent only , on securing its own return to power. •' Tho discussion ".was continued by Messrs. J. P.iyno,,and J, A. lrlanan. . . Mr. J. ff.' Brawn '{papier) was. ordered to resume his seat after he had been four, times previously warned for irrelevancy,.'and tedious repetition. Mr. R. (Wairau, Mr. H. G. 1511 (Cffristc'hurch South), Mr. D. S. MacUonald (Bay of Plenty), Mr. J. ."Robertson (Otaiii), Mr. P. C. Webb (Grey), aiid Mr. 11. Atmoro (Nelson) all supported the amendment,' argtiing on familiar lines. v . !|( , At O;IS?S.m.' a'fiiv^ii'wao taken on Sir Joseplr Ward's aineVramciit, and it was' defeated by 83' votes to 24. The amendments made in.tlie Bill in _ Committee were then agreed: to without further debate/ ■ '< •••' • Third Reading Roachcd. ■ ■■ On the motion that ■,the Bill be roid a third time, .' Sir Jds.eph Ward : (Awarua) ~pro'ceeded 'ceeded to'"put'on record'' tafei -place' in connection with thb vpas-sago-of; fflib-Bill. He said that in his 26 1 years of experience iiv Parliament be bad never known a course to' bo followed) such as'that adopted by the Government in' this- case.' ft .was dangerous to alter the method of election without- consulting the people; Mr. Fisher: -You didn't consult them about tho' Second ifiallot. Sir J. Ward repeated his assertion that Mr. Massey had promised to substitute another system of voting il ttai House should agree' to repeal the Second Ballot. He repeated his'accusation fuat the action of the Government in. bringing in the Sccond Ballot -repeal jas. an. amendment to a merely formal Bill was-no better than-ft-.trick. The Chairman's Action. He went 011 to refer to the "system" adopted by which some twenty numbers were guillotined, and denied ' tho right of free speech. Mr. Worries raised a point of order— that the honourable member was reflecting upon the Chairman of Co:r,imittccs. , , '.Sir J. Ward: I am making 110 . reflection upon the Chairman of Committees. I atii stating a- fact. 1 Mr. Speaker informed Sir Joseph Ward that lie must not reflect l upon the Chairman of Committees. Sir .T. Ward said that because ho referred to the action of the Chairman of Committees lie was not necessarily making a reflection upon him. But for tho first time in the Parliament of New 'Zealand a system had been adopted hv which members had been precluded from speaking. Mr. .Speaker said that this remark appeared, to him to be a reflection upon the Chairman of Committees in that- it inferred that the Chairman of Committees had gone outside the Standing Orders. ■ Sir J. Ward: 1 have nn desire to do anything.of the kind, Surely 1 • am entitled to refer to the consequence's of what took place in Committee 011 this BiH? Mr. Speaker said that such a referonce would be in order. - Sir Joseph Ward did not, however, go oil to refer to consequences, but asked Whether he was; not entitled to refer to the fact that- twenty members of the 'Mouse had been guillotined under an admittedly new system, and denied to them the right of free speech, Mr. Merries raised a point of order. TTo urged that the statement that the j Chairman of Committees interfered with 1 the right of free speech was not in order. Mr. Speaker said be did not think the honourable gentleman was intentionally reflecting vipmi the Chairman, but that; was certainly tho impression his words created. ■ * • Sir Joseph Ward did not Ira verse-fur-ther the action of Mr. Malcolm. He admitted, of course, lie said, 'bat minorities must lie ruled by majorities, hut he did not agree with the doctrine beiuc; propounded i hat a minority bad no .right- !o use all their powers to resist what they believe-;! W> be an injustice. Presently the Government would want !o introduce a properly qnaliiication for (lie franchise. Abo he accused, the (lovertit 11 e 111 ol a design to hasten the Hill Hi rough io make it apply to the f j\t tell oil by-elcclion. Government Straightforward. The Hon. \\. F. Massey (I'rime .iHniiler) said the honourable genihman bad evidently intended to leave thu impression; that the Government ■ Ijvwo, trying to get this Bill through

Parliament to jiiaUo it apply to tin? election :ii LyUelton. Ho V'isiieii to say that the honourable gentleman knew perft'otiv Willi that, 'tbe Hill was introduced while ATr- Lauronson- was still in liis place, before a by-election at Lyttelton was thought of. So far as the Government were concerned they Imd no intention of keeping back tl\o LytteJton election half an hour until this J Jill became law. His own honest opinion was that flic LyUelton election would take place weeks before the Bill came into operation. The Government intruded to act in a perfectly straightforward and honourable manner in connection with the LyUelton election, lie thought the suggestion a very unfair and improper one as put forward by tile Leader of tiie Opposition. He denied that the Government had broken any promise by their refusal to introduce r substitute for the Second Ballot, lint they lvero not anxious to rush in where angels feared t<: tread. He knew tho old system ' was not perfect, but beioie a ■ change was made be wished to be suro that they got something better than -the simple "lust past iii<> post system." He had heard a suggestion that proportional representation might apply to t'lso cities, awl the "first past tfia" post" system of election to the country, and lie thought this was tho best proposal yet made. Ho had also expressed opinions in favour of preferential voting, and he was not yet convinced that those opinions woro wrong. But the". Government must be certain they were' going to get something better than tho old system boforo they adopted it, Hie Leader of tho Opposition bad also declared in favour of the simple repeal -of the Second Ballot. Sir J. Ward: No, I havo always been iu f;tvonr of* a substitute. Mr. Massey then quoted from a speech of Sir Joseph Ward made in 1909 after one trial -of the Second Ballot, in which SlO had declared in favour of the ''old system," iSir J. AYard interrupted to say that that declaration was in favour of tiie old system of purging the roils, and not tiie old system of voting. Unusual tactiss Nocessary. Mi'. Massey went on to protest against the action of the Opposition in obstructing the motion to introduce the Second Ballot Repeal Bill. That had been, a most-, unusual course, and ho challenged the. honourable, member to cite - one single instance of such a. courso having been followed. AVhen such an unusual course was followed by tho Opposition, the.v must expect something unusual i'ro in. the Government. 'I'hern was , another , Bill on the Order I'apcr .into which an amendment to repeal tho second ballot could be- inserted, and the Gov.cnuucut chose to avoid further obstruction by putting tho amendment in the Bill. .And he mentioned that the Government were perfectly right in so doing. "Confusion, Inti'igus, and Dishonesty." "And, sir, why did wo want to get rid of tiie second ballot- sysU'W?" he continued. ".for reasons detailed in. the course of debate—because it was expensive, because tho expenditure upon it is out of till proportion to tho benefits likely to be derive:! by.'the community, •becarisc it haa led to a. humiliating system' of', bargaining in connection wall elections. . What uais gone' oil in many places has been a disgrace to the whole community. 1 it has been a disjjraco not only to tlicS people concerned, but to tiie whole of New inland. 1 made lip toy. mind that wo would get rid ol' "the Act at, the earliest possible moment. lam only sorry .now unit wo did-not stay: a few days longer) and do it last session. The second ballot system has been discredited'in aimost every'other country iiv.w-tiich it lias been tried.- In Belgium it/ihad' bedli' decljfi'M "an ciigjtio of confusion, intrigue and 'dishonesty.' " Against- tho; system of preferential voting • lib would urge tho fact that although t'lio' system was in vogue- ill ■sOmo of tho Australian States, it was itot ■ adopted'by 'the others,, nor by the Commonwealth. 'Liiero was 1 dissatisfaction with the system, and tho reason was that under- it bargaining and intriguing went on. Ho would never bo a party to introducing a system which would continue a system of bargaining and intrigue, of which they had had so much .experience at the last two elec--1 tiuns. There was ample precedent for iHo position taken up by the Chairman ■of Committees on ' tho previous'night, and lie proceeded to quote instances. Mr. G. ft'. Russell (Avon) assailed tho Government for tho. action taken in.. c.ormeetibti \VitTi the' Bill, and was so bothered by inspectors that' lie . -appealed several times to;the Speaker, and even threatened to discontinue his speech altogether, if the interjections did not cense. Mr. Russell declared that tho Chairman (Mr. Malcolm) bad applied .tho closure find that the. action was unprecedented in tho history of .the ■ 'New Zealand Parliament. (Left Sitting.)