Text corrections
PROPORTIONAL VOTING. DEBATE BY EXPERTS.
The Argus (Melbourne, Vic. : 1848 - 1956) Thursday 16 September 1915, page 8
Article
The Argus (Melbourne, Vic. : 1848 - 1956) Thursday 16 September 1915, page 8
Article
| Changed | By | Old Lines | New Lines |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2009-06-30 21:32:27.0 | anonymous | these mam points by argument and quota- | these main points by argument and quota- |
| 2009-06-30 21:31:21.0 | anonymous | system was equivalent lo plumping and | system was equivalent to plumping and |
| 2008-09-25 07:09:29.0 | user:public:gpowell | tint the present system did not ( nsurc l«o parties Only the other daj the Coiuitrj party had shown that time parties were Sossiblc lhere wcio four parties m the ntish Porbament now but Britain had the single electorate sjstem In further debate each spcal cr elaborated these mam points by argument and nuota tion The chairman expressed the thank» of the meeting to the speakers and a vote of thanks was passed to the chairman | that the present system did not ensure two parties. Only the other day the Country party had shown that three parties were possible. There were four parties in the British Parliament, now but Britain had the single electorate system. In further debate each speaker elaborated these mam points by argument and quota- tion. The chairman expressed the thanks of the meeting to the speakers, and a vote of thanks was passed to the chairman. |
| 2008-09-25 07:05:40.0 | user:public:gpowell | meant that i ciñesen tutu es of section might bo elected, while generally fivourcd candidates w ere eliminated lint the fatal defeet was that it 'His inimical to the Bnlish sjstem of part} government It party and lesponsibihly It was not in aceird with the nmclunery of the part) svs em, since it would tend to eiicoiinge tue i cprcscntation of small sections Hie filiation of thi people was not to (.ovcru but lo elect those who «ere to gmcra lhiso vvcie to be held responsil li Ik leprascntatioii of sepaiate Mettons would temi lo mob rule Ali Ilumphrejs respondí d bj dalara s | meant that representatives of sections might be elected, while generally favoured candidates were eliminated. But the fatal defect was that it was inimical to the British system of party government. It party and responsibility. It was not in accord with the machinery of the party system, since it would tend to encourage the representation of small sections. The function of the people was not to govern, but to elect those who were to govern. These were to be held responsible. The representation of separate sections would tend to mob rule. Mr. Humphreys responded by declaring |
| 2008-09-24 22:50:51.0 | user:public:gpowell | Mi John II Humphrejs (sccrctarj of the Proportion ii Representation Soeiety of Great Britain) last night mot in debate 'Mr 1 li .Ashworth, in a debate on the merits or otherwise of the Hare system of propof tional \ oting for the selection of Australian P-irhoments Air AV H Henwick was in the chair Hie debate look place in the i ooius of the rrcctrade Le t(,ue 1 ondon House, Ihribeth street Ihe nmlicnce na« Kinall Mi Humphrejs held that mort ami mon the present sjsteni of election de- prived a large number of citizen!, of icprc seiitation llic single t ransf« rabie Tote form of proportional representation gj.u each citiren nn effective \ote in the Govern mont of his country lins form gave more pou ei to the clectoi than any other form ¡Mr .Ashworth ndmitlcd min) of the drawbacks of the single electorate Svstem But even to day, and with these draw-hacks it was better than the H ue svstcm Hu« sjstem was cqun aient lo plumping and | Mr. John H. Humphreys (secretary of the Proportional Representation Society of Great Britain) last night met in debate Mr. T. R. Ashworth, in a debate on the merits or otherwise of the Hare system of propor- tional voting for the selection of Australian Parliaments. Mr. W. H. Renwick was in the chair. The debate look place in the rooms of the Freetrade League, London House, Elizabeth street. The audience was small. Mr. Humphreys held that more and more the present system of election de- prived a large number of citizens of repre- sentation. The single transferable vote form of proportional representation gave each citizen an effective vote in the Govern- ment of his country. This form gave more power to the elector than any other form. Mr. Ashworth admitted many of the drawbacks of the single electorate system. But even to-day, and with these drawbacks, it was better than the Hare system. This system was equivalent lo plumping and |