WELLINGTON NOTES

Hokitika Guardian, 2 May 1923, Page 1

WELLINGTON NOTES

THE DISSOLUTION THREAT. 1 AN ELECTION GAG. I i [Stecial To The Guardian.] I WELLINGTON, April 30 . Probably his friends have made more . use of the dissolution threat than has the Prime Minister himself, but if Mr Massey really has been telling the , electors of Oanturu that, if they return the Liberal candidate at to-morrow's by-election they will put the country to the expense of another appeal to the constituency's, he has placed himself in a somewhat invidious position. Mr K. S. Morton, who telegraphed to Mr Mnepliersnn on Saturday, ■is not the only person who heard Mr Massey state definitely after the Tauranga byelection that Mr MacMillan's return had given the Government a working majority and that there woukl.be no need for a dissolution. Tho statement was made publicly and reported m many of Lhc papers. It is true thatthe Government’s majority then, as it will whatever tho result of to-mor-row’s election, rested on tho goodwill of the three anti-Labour Liberals wbo saved it from defeat in the trial of strength during tho ' short session. But, so far as the public knows, those three votes still are at the disposal of Mr Massey on n no-eonfidence motion and in that case the position of the Government is no more critical to-day than it was immediately after the Tauranga decision. OFFICE WITHOUT POWER. There is a story going the rounds, however, to the effect that tho three anti-Labour Liberals who stood by tno Government in the division on tho no-confidence motion in February have given the Prime Minister to understand that they do not consider themselves pledged to support any part of the Government’s policy that may conflict with their election pledges or their own personal views. If this (s true, then Mr Massey has a very good excuse for introducing the dissolution bogey afresh. The general election left him in a minority of four, that is, the new House consisted of thirtyeight Reformers and forty-two Liberals and Labourites. The election of i Mr Stathnm to the Speakership reduced the Liberal-Labour majority to three, and tho three. anti-Labour Liberals voting with the Reformers on 1 the no-confidencc motion gave tho < Government a majority of three. But I if Mr Isitt, Mr Witty and Colonel Bell, while voting to keep tho Government in, joined with the Liberals and Labourites in keeping its measures out, Mr Massey and his colleagues

would be in the humiliating position of holding office without any legislative power. The return of Mr Leo would not help them in this respect, except in so far as it would place them in a rather better position to negotiate with the Opposition.

LABOUR AND MUNKIRAJ POLITICS.

No one is denying that the voting in the mayoral election hero represents a very big advance by Labour in municipal politics. In a record poll, Mr Peter Fraser, the Labour candiddate, received only some 250 fewer votes than did Mr R. A. Wright, the successful “Civic” candidate, and many people believe that if the 1000 odd votes given to Mr L. McKenzie, the third candidate, had been distributed under the preferential system among the other two aspirants for municipal honours Mr Fraser would have been returned. It is certain that a very large proportion of the votes accorded to Mr McKenzie would have been cast against Mr Wright Jn any case, and it scarcely can be doubted that it was file old quarrel between the Liberals and the Labourites that gave the sitting mayor his victory. Mr Wright is not personalty popular and depends entirely upon party organisation for his continuance in public life. Tho “Dominion,” the Mayor’s mainstay in both municipal ami national politics, points out that Mr Chapman, a Labour candidate for the City Council, received some 700 more votes than Mr Fraser did for the mayoralty, and suggests that had he been selected to contest tHo higher honour Labour would have boon successful. ELECTION OF LOCAL BODIES. Mr .fames Amos, the returning officer at last week’s municipal elections, who has been controlling local elections in W ellington for many years, thinks the whole system of voting requires revision. Ho declares that the present system is slow, unwieldy and ineffective and that its defects will become more and more flagrant as time progresses. He would hold the election.-. in the city in the parliamentary electorates included within its boundaries and would use the parliamentary '•fills. This would not mean a return to tho ward system, ho says, since the voles recorded in the separate electorates could he added together, but it would mean a great saving in time and money and a vast increase in efficiency. Mr Ames particularly protests against the use of two methods of marking the ballot papers a! the same polling and against the submission of so many issues to the voters.