The Maori Vote

Press, Volume XCIV, Issue 28013, 6 July 1956, Page 10

The Maori Vote

The case for another Maori seat in Parliament, it seems, may be pressed with some vigour before the next General Election. It should be given serious consideration by both legislators and public because its superficial persuasiveness could lead to a fundamentally wrong decision. The • justification for an additional Maori seat rests on the probability that the i I European electoral population quota will be about 26,000 for the 76 Euro.pean electorates, while a Maori population of about 135,000 is Represented in Parliament by four j members. It is, of course, a new [suggestion that Maori representation (should be based on population, and | the Maori members of Parliament be reminded that they are not [well placed to advance it. In 1945. jthe Labour Government altered the basis for computing electoral quotas [for the European electorates from “ population ” to “ adult population ”. ;The effect of this was to exclude 'children and minors from the comiPutation. On a basis of “adult

“ population ” there would be no case for a fifth Maori member. , Because of the higher proportion of persons below voting age among the Maori population, the Maori electoral rolls are considerably smaller than the European. At the last General Election the numbers on the rolls of the four Maori electorates were 13.654, 9434, 7436, and 9981. The European rolls varied between 112.238 and 18,990, the average being about 15,000. A striking increase in the Maori birth rate compared with [the European, particularly in the past decade, makes it possible to iargue for another Maori member on a basis of population; and it is j because the National Party in 195 n [restored the basis for computation ■to “population” (thereby including jchildren) that it is possible to compare electorates to the advantage of

the Maori argument. The Maori members voted for the Labour Government’s legislation (which, if still in force, would knock the bottom out of the case for a fifth member) and against the National Party Government’s legislation (without which there would be no case). These political expediencies aside, Maori representation is not, and never has been, based on population. In 1857, special representation in Parliament was provided for four Maori members, who were to be elected regardless of population. Neither was changed European representation to affect the Maori representation. There have been four Maori members constantly since 1867, though European representation varied from 72 in 1867 to 74 in 1872, 84 in 1875, 91 in 1881, 70 in 1887, and 76 from 1900. The most desirable electoral advance for the Maoris, and the direction from which it should come, were clearly and wisely indicated in 1949 by Sir Apirana Ngata when he said that “ within the next de•'cade we [the Maoris] will request “ the abolition of the present system *' of Maori representation in Parlia- “ ment, and insist on being repre- “ sented in common with the “ Europeans in Parliament ”. Both Sir Apirana Ngata and Sir Peter Buck saw that the welding of the two races into a New Zealand nation would be achieved only by political integration. Separate Maori politics are fostered by the system of separate Maori representation For example, several seats in the New Zealand Parliament are virtu- ■ ally controlled by a Maori church lin which Europeans have no part I The Maoris’ special interests coulc !be well protected in an integrated I political system, in which the : electoral influence of the Maori vot< j would be spread more widely thar ! at present. It is to be hoped tha the present Maori leaders will b< l as wise as Sir Apirana Ngata ar.c . Sir Peter Buck. It will be to the ' advantage of neither the Maoris noi the nation as a whole if the presen lines of political and electors division are confirmed a.id fortified