Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

I happened to go through some literature on the subject and I found there is great force in what he said. The same difficulty was felt in England, and there was a Royal Commission to go into the question of all electoral systems.As a result, two bills were introduced in 1908 in the Houseof Commons by Mr. Robertson and they found that`proportional representation' was not the proper word. Thesystem is all right, i.e., the transferability of voting,when there is a multiplicity of candidates; when the election to be made is only for one candidate, it is obvious that in order to get an absolute majority, we must have what is known as transferability. That is admitted. But in thecase of single-member constituency they have hit upon the word--the proper word is what they call `alternative vote'.I only take leave, Sir, to read an authority on the subject--Humphreys--in this connection. This is what the author says:--

"The object is to ensure that in a parlI amentary election effect shall be given as far as possible to the wishes of the majority of electors voting. Under the present system when there are more than two candidates for one seat it is possible that the member elected may be chosen by a minority of the voters.
"The Bill proposes to allow electors to indicate on their ballot papers to what candidate they would wish their votes to be transferred if the candidate of their first choice is third or lower on the poll and no candidate has an absolute majority. It thus seeks to accomplish by one operation the effect of a second ballot.