The Guradian (And Evening Star, with which is incorporated the West Const Times.) FRIDAY, MAY 11th, 1923. LOCAL BODY VOTING.

Hokitika Guardian, 11 May 1923, Page 2

The Guradian (And Evening Star, with which is incorporated the West Const Times.) FRIDAY, MAY 11th, 1923. LOCAL BODY VOTING.

At tlio various local body elections there are always an unusual number of informal votes. In the late municipal elections, particularly in the larger centres, the proportion of informal votes was quite out of reason in several instances. Just why Parliament should make a, distinction in the systems of voting for general and local body voting, is not clear, but it is a fact that tho differing systems do create confusion in many minds, and the result is the surprising number of informal votes. In the parliamentary elections, the voter exercises his opinion by striking out the name of the candidate or candidates for whom he desires not to vote. This was the original system introduced into New Zealand, and although it emphasises the voter’s negative opinion, it reveals the affirmative view the more clearly. Then came tho amendment to the law affecting local body voting by enacting that the voter shall place a cross opposite the name of • the candidate or candidates for whom he desires to record his vote. This was an opposite practice to that formerly in vogue. The elector’s vote was now exercised by a positive and not a negative act, and tho changeover created not a little confusion, hut while declaring for a change of system, the law was made elastic enough to also embrace the old way of voting, and tho striking out method is still legal, though voters are often confused by the fact, that the permissive method is not indicated to the voter bv the printed instructions on the ballot paper. The directions there state the preference is to be shown by the crow, and confusion arises in many minds at the last moment, when about to exercise the vote as to just what should be done. There is an agitation going forward now that the law should 'be more definite and conclusive on the point, and also, that the voting systems should be uniform. There is of course, the question of the preferential voting system to he taken into account for some local bodies, though this radical change is not likely to become very general for some years to come. But in respect to other polls and the recording of votes for local bodies and parliamentary elections, the fact that f uniformity were enacted it would lead to loss confusion, and to a clearer expression of public opinion. Some might say that whatever the system, if the directions are clearly printed the voter should be intelligent enough to comprehend, and exercise his vote legally and that it would be a test of his mentality and ability to vote intelligently. But use or force of habit is not always easy to discard, and mistakes are made often by those believed to be the most intelligent. In any case the voting system should he simple; it should rot be such as to create conundrums, yet that is what the present dual system for local body voting often presents to some minds. In reality, to vote by an affirmative expression with the pencil, is tlie most rutional way to exercise a vote, and yet the placing of a cross agfilnit the Pome confuses many who

consider it the act of black-marking the candidate. So there is a suggestion of confusion almost any way, and the best way is for Parliament to cut the gordian knot by enacting a definite form of voting, but let it be a uniform one for both parliamentary and local 'body elections. Doubtless the matter will be brought forward at the coming session, as in more than one instance various municipalities are discussing the matter and concrete steps are sure to be taken for sonic amendment of the law.