THE TASMANIAN DEADLOCK

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVII, Issue 8339, 28 January 1913, Page 3

THE TASMANIAN DEADLOCK

AND HOW IT MIGHT BE EEMEMED,

To tie Editor “N.Z. Times."

_ Sir,—ln your interesting leader of Saturday, on lire result ot tire proper' cionai election just held in Tasmania, you made reiorcnce to tno fact Unit for die second election in succession tlie proportional system has produced a deadlock between tho parties. Before the New Zealander, “wiio has just been over there/' and who happens to be opposed to proxjortional representation, tens us what some opxjoneut of the system there told him, it is as well to call attention to the causes which opeiate in Tasmania to produce deadlocks. Naturally, we are all the more interested in proportional representation since the introduction of Mr Bell's Bill to reform the Upper House. The first cause operating in Tasmania to produce a deadlock is the small House of only thirty members. A majority of one in Tasmania is equivalent to almost three in New Zealand, and to twenty-two In England. While one man is required to fill the Speaker’s chair in all cases it takes one-thirtieth of the House in Tasmania, one-eightieth in New Zealand, and one-six hundred and sixtieth in England. In other words, in incapacitating one man from voting in Tasmania you are doing what could only bo done by incapacitating three in New Zealand, or twenty-rwo in England. When you have appointed your Sneaker in Tasmania and have used up onevhirtieth of tho House, .which is onefifteenth of tho majority, your majority is gone, or so attenuated that only a great disproportion in the respective sides of the parties leaves it in a working condition.

The remedy is to increase the number of members. ' There is, however, another cause, and one which should be a lesson to us hero. In Tasmania there arc lire electorates, each electorate returning six members. The figures for the election before this one have been carofull yexamined and the following interesting table prepared:

* This table shows us that where six memVjers had to bo elected in Bass, 3i Liberals out of 60 secured the same number of members as' 20 Labourites out of 60; in' Lanvin 28 out of 60 got the same representation as 32 out of 60; and in Franklin 34 out of 60 got no more members than 26 out of 60. The lesson to be learnt therefrom is that with six members. there has to be a big disproportion "between parties, greater than 34 to 26 in every 60, before you get otlier than equality of representation. Another point to be noted is that when you get away from equality, or 3 to 3, you get 4 to 2. which is a proportion of 2to 1. Although it happened to come out all right in Wilraot it was just as likely to be as far off the proper proportion, as is equality of members when one side has 34 votes to the other’s 26.

With every single electorate saving the parties equality of representation, even ■where there is a fair disproportion of votes, the result must be that the parties must come out equal, except for an accident. To remedy that the number of members to be elected should be an odd number, 3,5, 7,9, etc., the larger the better, but never an equal number. In practice the rival sides are never absolutely equal, and it is necessary in administration work that there should b'o some majority to work on. You meet the two cases by Using an odd number. Had Tasmania, in the election quoted above, seven instead of sis members fo: each electorate, the Liberal victories of Hass, lleni-son and Franklin would hav returned majorities of members. Darwin’s Labour majority would have done {Tie same thing, and a working majority would have been the result. This is not by any means new. Ten years ago if was pointed out in Victoria by Professor Nansen and Colonel ileCny, ami exactly the position foretold that has since happened in Tasmania. The Tasmanian House wars told the same thing in 1913.. by the State officers who reported on the general election held before that date, but the members thought they knew better than Messrs Packer,, Piesse and Daly and the present impossible position is the result. In New Zealand, with our light party bonds, so different from Australia, we have a rough and ready, though very practical, way of settling the difficulty arising from equality between .parties. A

few go over from one side to the other, pureiv, of course, in the interests of the country. Good old country to possess sons prepared to so sacrifice themselves. - 1 am - * tC '’ ROBERT McNAB. "Xgatiawa,” Palmerston, January 27th.

Voters (out of every 60). Members. Lib, . Lab. Lib. Lab. I>ass ...... 31 29 3 3 Darwin ... 32 3 3 Denison ... 31 29 3 3 i'rankl in 26 3 3 vViimot ... 40 20 4 2