XN000022-1985-04-03 — Page 14

12

WEDNESDAY, APRIL, 198

+ALSO THERE MUST BE A WAY TO REMOVE A PERSON OF UNSOUND MIND FROM OFFICE SO THAT HIS CONSTITUENCY CAN ELECT A REALLY COMPETENT REPRESENTATIVE TO SERVE THEIR INTEREST, SHE SAID.

DR IP SAID SHE WAS GLAD THAT THE ADMINISTRATION HAD AGREED TO AMEND THE BILL TO MEET THIS POINT WITH A NEW CLAUSE 21(2) WHICH READ:-

+A PERSON SHALL BE DISQUALIFIED:-

(A)

(B)

FROM BEING NOMINATED AS A CANDIDATE IN AN ELECTION IF THERE IS IN FORCE A DECISION UNDER THE MENTAL HEALTH ORDINANCE THAT HE IS OF UNSOUND MIND AND INCAPABLE OF MANAGING HIMSELF AND HIS AFFAIRS;

FROM HOLDING OFFICE AS AN ELECTED MEMBER IF A DECISION

IS MADE UNDER THE MENTAL HEALTH ORDINANCE THAT HE IS OF UNSOUND MIND AND INCAPABLE OF MANAGING HIMSELF AND HIS AFFAIRS, BUT A PERSON DISQUALIFIED UNDER THIS PARAGRAPH SHALL BE ELIGIBLE FOR RE-ELECTION IF UNDER THAT ORDINANCE IT IS SUBSEQUENTLY FOUND THAT HIS UNSOUNDNESS OF MIND HAS CEASED.+

+1 HOPE CONSIDERATION WILL BE GIVEN TO AMEND THE DISTRICT BOARD AND URBAN COUNCIL ORDINANCES SO AS TO BRING THEM BOTH IN LINE WITH THIS ORDINANCE, SHE ADDED.

COMMENTING ON THE METHOD OF VOTE COUNTING FOR FUNCTIONAL CONSTITUENCIES BY WAY OF +AN ABSOLUTE MAJORITY+, DR IP SAID SHE BELIEVED THAT UNLESS THE VOTERS WERE BY LAW REQUIRED TO INDICATE THE IR SECOND AND SUBSEQUENT CHOICE ON THE BALLOT PAPERS, IT MIGHT DEFEAT THE PURPOSE OF ADOPTING THIS PRINCIPLE.

BY +ABSOLUTE MAJORITY+, DR IP SAID SHE WAS GIVEN TO BELIEVE THAT THE VOTERS MIGHT INDICATE ON THE BALLOT PAPER HIS FIRST, SECOND, THIRD CHOICE ETC. OF CANDIDATES. WHEN THE VOTES WERE COUNTED, THE FIRST CANDIDATE TO OBTAIN OVER 50 PER CENT OF THE FIRST CHOICE VOTES WOULD BE ELECTED. IF NO CANDIDATE MANAGED TO WIN IN THIS FIRST COUNT, THE SECOND CHOICE VOTES WOULD ALSO BE COUNTED SO AS TO IDENTIFY THE FIRST PERSON TO GET OVER 50 PER CENT OF THE TOTAL VOTES OF BOTH THE FIRST AND THE SECOND CHOICES. THIS PROCESS WOULD CONTINUE UNTIL A SUCCESSFUL CANDIDATE IS PRODUCED.

DR IP WARNED THAT IF NO VOTER SHOULD PUT DOWN HIS SECOND AND SUBSEQUENT CHOICE THERE WOULD BE A REAL DANGER THAT NO CANDIDATE WOULD PASS THE 50 PER CENT MARK IN A PRETTY EVEN HANDED CONTEST.

+ IF THIS WAS TO HAPPEN, FEAR THAT REVOTING MAY BE NECESSARY AND IT WILL BE TIME WASTED. I ALSO CONSIDER THAT TO BE FAIR, FIRST CHOICE VOTES SHOULD SCORE MORE THAN SECOND- CHOICE VOTES AND LIKEWISE FOR THE SUBSEQUENT VOTES, WHETHER SUCH CALCULATIONS ARE DONE MANUALLY OR BY COMPUTER IT SHOULD STILL BE POSSIBLE, SHE SAID.

/12