THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY TUESDAY, JUNE 23, 1908. MAJORITY REPRESENTATION.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXI, Issue 9122, 23 June 1908, Page 4

THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY TUESDAY, JUNE 23, 1908. MAJORITY REPRESENTATION.

In what may be perfect good faith, the Premier proposes a drastic alteration in the method of returning members to the Dominion's Parliament. It is proposed, in effect, that the member returned to Parliament at next election shall show a majority of the votes polled at the election to have been cast in his favour. From a party point of view this may appear to be a wise precaution, but in reality it involves the creation of a very unwise and intolerable system. The Premier and his colleagues evidently labour under the impression that party Government is the natural form of Government created by the people's will; it is nothing of the

sort, being, in truth, merely the outcome of Parliamentarians' eccentricities-, the result of elected candidates joining, for good or for bad, for better or for worse, one party, uncer the impression that their constituents have demanded it and approve it. As a matter of fact a large number of electors really do not care what a candidate calls himself. A large proportion of the electors judge the candidate by his speeches, his expressed convictions and intentions, and understand and care not whether those intentions involve his support to the present Administration, his opposition to the present Administration, or require the formation of a Ministry of his own; all they know and care about is that the candidate's intentions are pleasing and acceptable to their ideas of what should be, or ought to be done. A still greater proportion of the electors vote for a man as a man, believing him to be honest, and one who will, no matter what Party he may be pleased to join, do what he conscientiously believes to be in the best interests of his countrymen. It is no infrequent matter for a man, with distinctly Liberal tendencies, to come out under the banner of the Opposition, and for a candidate with Ultra-Liberal leanings to sail under the banner of the present Government. Yet the Government propotc to further buffoon the silly business by stipulating that, say, the Government candidate shall poll an absolute majority of the votes cast at the election, in order that the majority of the people (otherwise one Party) may be represented in Parliament. As a guide to clearness let ua &ay that Jones (Government), Briggs (Government), Smith (Opposition), and Hannigan (Socialist) stand at next election for Auckland City. Jones is a poor linguist and his arguments are childish; the people don't therefore take a fancy to him, but 60U friends vote for him. Briggs, by his lack of education and inability to see that two and two make four, is obviously unfit to represent any enlightened constituency in Parliament;nevertheless COO workers, loyal to their fellow, cast their privilege in his favour. Hannigan (Socialist) has no particular views, and consequently the electors exercise no particular view concerning him, but .his Aunts, Cousins and personal friends number 100. Smith (Opposition) appeals to the heart of the electors; he is obviously an able.man, a clever .speaker, gifted with sound common sense, and although *'agin" the Government, give 3 the electors the impression that he will do his best in the interests of his fellows; that, in effect, if the Government 'bring forward a worthy measure he will support it, and if the measure be unworthy, he will not support it. One thousand electors record their votes in his favour. Now, Sir Joseph and his colleagues propose to declare that Smith does not represent the majority voice of his constituency, inasmuch as he has polled only 1,000 votes, as against 1,300 polled by Jones, Briggs and Hannigan together; the inference bein? that if Briggs had not been there to rplit the Government vote, and Hannigan had attended to his daily business, Jones would have received the 1,300 votes, or at least the 1,200 votes recorded in favour of the Government Party An absurd fallacy! The majority of the electors judge the man as a man, and vole for him' because they believe him to be of the candidates standing, the man best litted to represent them in the Dominion's Parliament. The present bare majority system is the accepted system over the greater part of the woil I, where the masses exercise Governmental control'by means of the vote. The ab-solute-majority proposal is perforated with mischief. It proposes to perpetuate a party system that, however useful, the people do not realise the necessity for as many Parliamentarians appear to mistakenly imagine. It means the attempted levelling down of tha election to two candidates, whereas it is in the best interests of good Government that as many able men aa possible untramelled by party control and influence, should offer themselves to the people's free and unrestricted choice. Unless one of the candidates be a peculiarly prominent man, the possibility of his securing an absolute majority, or as many votes as the other five candidates (presuming they aie six) put together, is exceedingly remote; in fa"t, out ot the question. A little less party, and a little more common sense would, at this stage of New Zealand's history, wonderfully help our Dominion along the path of -progress and contentment.