Australasian Union? REAL ADVANTAGES IN FEDERATION

Press, Volume CI, Issue 29842, 7 June 1962, Page 19

Australasian Union? REAL ADVANTAGES IN FEDERATION

I Specialty written tor “The Preet" by JOHN H RVANSI

In recent weeks there has been a new discussion of the common interests and purposes of New Zealand and Australia. The reasons for this have been largely economic, for Great Britain's application to join the European Economic Community undoubtedly threatens the trading prospects, and therefore the standard of living, of both countries of Australasia. The question of Commonwealth trade preferences is unsettled; and if Great Britain subscribes to the Treaty of Rome without safeguards for the Dominions we shall be faced with a very serious situation. It is therefore not surprising that the Prime Minister has emphasised that New Zealand and Australia must draw closer together.

It is not the purpose of this article to discuss what form of economic action is necessary in the present circumstances. There is presumably a general agreement that, whatever happens in Europe, an Australasian common market is a desirable objective. The other aspect of the problem is political. and in a speech to the International Commission of Jurists in Wellington in March Sir Leslie Munro drew our attention to this. "The day may come.” he said, “when we may have to have closer constitutional relations with Australia. Indeed, in these days of fragmentation of sovereignty, it is somewhat remarkable that we have not already these closer relations.” The implications of this statement deserve to be carefully examined, though it is not easy for the citizens of either of two independent Dominions to do so with completely unprejudiced minds. No "Take-Over” It is also important that the matter should be considered in good time, and not left until an economic crisis clouds dispassionate thinking. When we contemplate the difficulties inherent in the idea of the Council of Europe, with its problems of sovereignty, language, and social difference, it becomes clear that New Zealand and Australia are in many ways admirably suited for some form of political union Both are British Dominions without difference of sovereignly: the people are predominantly of British stock; their political traditions and social customs are similar. This far outweighs the objection that a wide expanse of sea separates the two Dominions: after all, Wellington is

nearer to Canberra than Canberra is to Perth Mr Holyoake has declared aimself strongly opposed to the idea of New Zealand as the seventh State of Australia. and has jokingly offered to take over Australia as a dependency and guide it to independence, The word •take-over” with its unpleasant associations must of course be avoided in any discussion of political union between the two Dominions; nor could New Zealand al this stage of its . history simply become the seventh State of Australia Whether it could become one of the seven States of a United States of Australasia is another matter. This might be achieved by the adaption of the present Australian Constitution, with or without special conditions for New Zealand. The alternative is some looser kind of federation or political union which would preserve the separate political identity of the two Dominions

A Price to Pay The federal Constitution of Australia is contained in the Commonwealth Act of 1900 and its amendments, and it is interesting to note that when the act was drawn up New Zealand was named (Article 8) as one of the possible States of the Commonwealth. As it is, Australia consists of six States and two Federal Territories. The States agreed to federate for their common advantage. The price paid for this solidarity was a certain surrender of independence; and a Commonwealth Parliament was set up with 39 definite legislative powers enumerated in Article 51 of the act. The list is too long to be detailed here, but it is necessary to name those matters which are obviously better dealt with collectively than by the individual States. These include trade and com merce, foreign and domestic, postal and .Hied services, defence, currency and coinage, banking other than State banking, naturalization and aliens, social security, immigration and emigration, and external affairs Each State has its own Parliament with powers limited by Article 51 and by the proviso in Article 109 that when the law of a State is inconsistent with a taw of the Commonwealth the latter prevails, and the former is invalid to the extent of the inconsistency In the Commonwealth Parliament each State is represented, irrespective of population and size, by 10 elected Senators in accordance with the wellestablished federal principle, while under Article 24 the numbers of the House of Representatives must be as nearly as practicable twice the number of Senators The present number Is 124. including two members with limited voting rights repreenting the Federal Territories Senators in Parliament Representation in the Lower House is divided among the States on a population oasis If this system were preserved in an Australasian federal union, it is possible to Indicate what the division would be between the States, although the population figures given are only a general approximation.

To this would be added two members for the Federal Territories, representing about 80.000 people. The ad’’antages oi sucn a federal union to New Zealand, enjoying equal representation with all other States, large and small, in a Senate, and having about 18 per cent of the seats in the Ixiwer House, are attractive and New Zealanders would, of course take a prominent part in the government and administration of a union of over 13 million people With a common market and common citizenship it is natural to go on to unite for other purposes, and in matters of defence the two Dominions have gone far in this direction by then adherence to the S.E A.TO alliance and the A N Z U.S Pact A combined foreign policy and diplomatic service would make for both efficiency and economy, and there could be 3 united effort to deal with the problems of Asian poverty in the ‘‘Near North ” At home there would be an enrichment of social and culturallife on both sides of the Tasman Looser Unions It is also possible to envisage some form of looser confederation Some kind of Council of Australasia would enable both partners to nake a joint approach to their r-ommon problems and at the same time preserve then political identity This is surely the mimimum required. but. being a minimum its effectiveness would be necessarily limited For consultation and deliberation it would be excellent; but it is important to recognise that al! the council’s recommendations and decisions would have to be referred to the separate Government, and Parliaments, and that action would be dependent on the assent of both sides In abort, the council would have no final authority Another possible way of cooperation would be to give New Zealand a limited power of representation in the Australian Parliament: but that would reduce our status from that of partnership to one of subsidiary association It would be wasteful in manpower and intolerable in practice These considerations are

not put forward as blueprints for union, but rather as a clarification of the problems involved, with a general sketch of possible solutions Actual federations are in fact always the outcome of lengthy negotiations and hard bargaining. However no one will deny that New Zealand and Australia have many common problems. needs and interests, all of which demand concerted action which, if confined to economic and commercial measures, will be inadequate to meet a critical situation -

State Population Dec., 1961 No of members New South Wales .... 4,114,000 43 Victoria 3,110 000 32 New Zealand .... 2.480 000 26 Queensland .... 1.585,000 16 South Australia 1.025.000 11 Western Australia 800,000 8 Tasmania .... 375.000 4 Total ' .... 13.470.000 140