VOTES FOR SOLDIERS UNDER 21

Press, Volume CVI, Issue 31112, 15 July 1966, Page 3

VOTES FOR SOLDIERS UNDER 21

Opposition Rejects Bill In Present Form

(New Zealand Press Association) WELLINGTON, July 14. Opposition members today condemned the Electoral Amendment Bill in its present form.

The bill will give servicemen under 21 the right to vote if they are engaged in specially defined danger zones overseas. When the bill was returned from the Statutes Revision Committee today with the recommendation that it be allowed to proceed, Opposition reaction was immediate. Dr. A. M. Finlay (Opp., Waitakere) said the committee’s report did not give proper weight to the evidence it had received. The bill had been changed substantially, but it still contained the obnoxious features to which the Opposition had objected.

The Leader of the Opposition (Mr Kirk) said his party would reject the bill—it requires 75 per cent majority to be carried—unless it was returned to the committee and the changes the Opposition sought were made.

When the bill was introduced on June 10, Mr Kirk said it meant the Government would be able to decide which Servicemen should vote. “It is objectionable that the Government can pick and choose." Mr Hanan said the areas would be defined after consultation with the Minister of Defence. Dr. Finlay today explained amendments made by the committee. First, in determining which areas would qualify as danger tones, the Governor-General would act on the recommendation of the Minister of justice, given with the concurrence of the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition. I A second amendment incorporated a private member’s fneasure, the Electoral Amendment Bill introduced last session by Mr H. G. R. Mason (Opp., New Lynn). • A third amendment would Jive any serviceman who had qualified as a voter by being in a designated area the right to continue to vote. • “I have seen quite a number of editorials opposed to the bill, and none in support,” said Dr. Finlay. He referred to a "powerful sermon” “drastically” against the bill delivered in Mr Hanan’s electorate.

• R.S.A. Letter S Representations to the comjnittee by the Returned Services’ Association had some fcurious features.” On July i, a week after submissions had been made, the committee feceived a letter, also dated July 6, from the R.S.A.'s •resident, supporting the bill. 1 The Public Service Association submitted tha‘ the bill was inconsistent with democratic principles. “Persuasive logic” was presented by two lawyers, one of whom trgued that should the bill fce passed, persons classified fry the Government as subversive might lose their votes. Pay Difference Dr. Finlay said the R.S.A. had pointed out that equal danger earned equal pay. He said he was astounded to hear that servicemen under 21 were paid less. Mr Hanan said the pay of servicemen had nothing to do with qualifications. The Speaker (Sir Ronald Algie) said Dr. Finlay was in order to cite evidence given to the committee. “If a life is in danger, are we going to continue to say those lives are of unequal value because of a difference in age?” Dr. Finlay asked. He urged the Government to forget the bill and set about “ridding the country of this intolerable state of affairs.” Mr Hanan said Dr. Finlay's remarks illustrated the difference between the Labour Party today and that which governed the country during the Second World War. The bill was in line with [legislation passed by the

war-time Labour Government. A few student groups were critical of the bill, but the R.S.A. wholeheartedly supported it Mr Hanan said it was true that by reason of age some servicemen were paid less ; than others. He agreed with much Dr. Finlay had said, “but it is irrelevant. “We believe that any young man, whatever his age, who is prepared to risk his life and does, in fact, risk his life in service of this country is entitled to a vote,” said Mr Hanan. Mr C. J. Moyle (Opp., Manukau, a member of the Statutes Revision Committee, suggested the R.S.A. letter had been sent by request. In submissions to the committee, the Constitutional Society claimed it was fundamentally bad legislation and full of anomalies. Several Government members on the committee were clearly unhappy that this legislation had been thrust upon them. Mr R. E. Jack (Govt., Waimarino) had said: “It is a pity we have this unfortunate legislation,” and Sir Leslie Munro (Govt., Waipa) had commented: “The vote is a civilian matter and should be determined by civilians.” Mr Hanan, said Mr Moyle, had remarked: “The amendment makes this imperfect legislation a little less imperfect.” Later Sir Leslie Munro told the House that “since time immemorial, those who fought for their country have been given certain privileges.” When a man went in peril of his life, it was normally the custom to give him certain privileges. Out Of Order Sir Walter Nash (Opp., Hutt), was ruled out of order when he attempted to explain Labour views during war time. Mr Hanan said Sir Walter Nash was entitled to explain “why the Labour Party supported this bill in the Second World War and not now.” Sir Walter Nash attempted to continue but was interrupted by the Speaker, who said he was going beyond what could normally be expected in such a debate. “My view is that the legislation is illogical, but it does follow the traditions of two wars,” said Mr Jack. “I think it is fair to say that this is the first time in my nine years on the committee that views expressed in committee have been brought up in the House.” Mr Jack said the opinions members expressed at committee meetings tended to be “off the cuff.” “This is the first time words of this sort have been brought back into this House and quoted in this way.” “Bad Precedent” If the private discussions of committees and the expression of views were to be quoted in the House then the value of the fair and often frank non-party talks could be impaired. “I think it is a very bad precedent set by Mr Moyle,” said Mr Jack.

Mr Kirk said that from the Speaker’s rulings it was quite clear a member could “rakeup anything.” Government voices: Rake’s the word. Mr Kirk: I will remind members on the opposite side of some of the muck-raking that went on, and which some of those members brought up in a licensing committee.” He said the statement that a precedent had been set in two world wars was not correct. The provisions in the bill were not the same as those carried out during the last war. “It is true that servicemen under 21 were allowed to vote because a number of men had gone overseas under age and this was recognised. We were at war with three countries on a world-wide front Are we at war on this front today?” Mr Kirk said the Minister of Defence (Mr Eyre) had stated that New Zealand was not actually at war. “Some people claim that we are at war, while the Minister of Defence claims we are not. I will not have anything to do with any legislation that picks and chooses on the voting rights of the people of this country.” Mr Kirk said the special service areas had not been defined as Mr Eyre had promised last year. Majority Refused The Constitutional Society, which had earned a reputation in constitutional law, was opposed to the bill, so was the Auckland Presbyterian Society. He cited the possibility of a serviceman, under 21, serving in a danger zone a month before an election when he would be eligible to vote. The serviceman could “get his legs shot off,” come home and not be able to vote. Government voice: Not true. Mr Kirk said the bill did not take into consideration the police in Cyprus, young people serving in Volunteer Service Abroad, missionaries, merchant seamen—“all of whom are serving their country.” The bill required a 75 per cent majority of the House before it could become law. “We propose it should go back to the committee and that the committee should be instructed to include that if there is any lowering of the voting age, all persons should be included. Until that time we will not provide the necessary members for the 75 per cent majority. We are not prepared to write partial laws.” “One of the reasons the report is imperfect is that not

only does it discriminate against sections of our society —but it also discriminates within our armed services,” said Mr A. J. Faulkner (Opp., Roskill). “Some servicemen will get the vote, some will not.” Mr D. J. Riddiford (Govt., Wellington Central) said it was a good principle to give servicemen who were fighting the vote at an earlier age. “We have not been convinced we should co-operate,” said Mr S. A. Whitehead (Opp., Nelson). “This is not a measure the Government can bulldoze through because they have 45 members and we have 35.” He moved that the bill be referred back to the committee. Mr D. Maclntyre (Govt., Hastings) said the bill should be discussed fully and frankly in the House instead of being “shut away in committee.” The House had command of the bill, and could argue about it and amend it. A serviceman could go overseas at 19 with his parents’ consent. Men under 21 could serve in Vietnam. A high percentage of servicemen came from the four Maori electorates (all held by Labour). “I am certain this is not a political move,” said Mr Maclntyre. Minister’s Letter Mr R. J. Tizard (Opp., Pakuranga) said Mr MacIntyre misunderstood the position “In its present form, this bill has no chance of passing into law.” Mr Riddiford had suggested the R.S.A. representations were the only important ones, said Mr Tizard, but neglected to say the R.S.A. did not bother to appear before the committee. Several Government members of the committee had tried to run away from the statements they had made in committee. Mr D. S. Thomson (Govt., Stratford) said all returned servicemen would be shocked by the Opposition’s attitude to delay the bill. “It seems to me that the overwhelming amount of evidence before the committee was not in favour of the bill in this form,” said Mr N. J. King (Opp., Waitemata). “It appears that at the eleventh hour a letter was inserted by Mr Hanan in support of the bill. I think it could be said that this does break a democratic principle of universal suffrage.” Mr W. A. Sheat (Govt., Egmont) accused the Opposition of trying to deny young servicemen overseas a vote, unless they can get a general lowering of the voting age. The debate was interrupted by the tea adjournment. Queen's Scouts.—Queen’s Scout badges were presented to two members of the Wigram air scout troop last evening. The district commissioner for the Rimu district (Mr R. E. Howard) presented the badges to David Smith, aged 17, and Anthony Perrett, aged 18, at a ceremony at the base.