COMMENT FROM THE CAPITAL THE SIZE OF PARLIAMENT COMES UNDER EXAMINATION

Press, Volume CVII, Issue 31381, 29 May 1967, Page 12

COMMENT FROM THE CAPITAL THE SIZE OF PARLIAMENT COMES UNDER EXAMINATION

(From Our Own Reporter! WELLINGTON, May 28.—The size of the New Zealand Parliament, which has been stable for many years, came under close examination last week. As expected, there will be four more members of the House of Representatives after the 1969 General Election; and the Parliament in which they sit may well have a four-year term. The decision to increase the number of members was made two years ago, and implementation was linked to the result of last year’s Census. The Census was held early in the year, but complications surrounding the defining of new electorate-lines were so many that the main decisions are only j ust being made.

By legislation passed in 1965, South Island seats were fixed at 25, instead of the present 24. Had Labour won the General Election, this number might well have been amended to 26. From now on (unless there is another amendment) the standard European electorate will contain one-twenty-fifth of the number of people who were shown living in the South Island on Census Day. Thus, the size of Parliament must be expected to continue to increase from Census to Census—and the rate of Increase will be dependent on the rate by which North Island population increase continues to exceed that of the South. When the House discussed the subject last year, and earlier, an element of regional bargaining was discernible. The announcement by the chairman of the Electoral Boundaries Commission (Mr L. G. H. Sinclair, S.M.), that there would be four new seats, including one in the South Island, raises the questions: Was the 1965 decision a wise one? Is this the ultimate answer?

The difficulty is accentuated by the fact that ours is now a unicameral system. Neither main party has evinced any interest in bringing back an Upper House. Thus the emphasis is firmly on the one-elector-one-vote system—and representation must go to the “big battalions” in the North. Adjusting the Imbalance

Both the United States and Australia have Senates based on regional representation—two Senators for each State in the United States, irrespective of population, ten for each Australian State.

A high legal source suggests that one method of adjusting the population imbalance between the North and South Islands would be to go back to our long-abandoned Provincial System—to the extent that we should give our Provinces the same type of representation as the States in the U.S. and Australian States. This would mean that we would vote for two or more Provincial “senators” each General Election, as well as voting for our own local member. The Provinces could be so arranged as to provide Six in each island—a minimum of 24 regional representatives. This House (the temptation

would be to call it “Senate”) could be empowered to meet on regional subjects. Another suggestion has been that it could follow the United States system and met in “congress” with the House of Representatives on selected subjects. The position concerning Maori seats is closely related. The Attorney-General and Minister of Maori Affairs (Mr Hanan) has chosen- this time to declare again his conviction that the purely Maori seat should be abolished.

It is not known yet what can be done about this—or whether anything more is intended. The question has an obvious bearing, however, on the number of seats to be occupied in the Parliamentary Chamber in the next few years. The four-seat increase intended for 1969 would be cancelled out neatly by the removal of the four Maori seats. A Full House Mr Hanan's view, it is understood, is a purely personal one. To abolish the Maori seats would require a referendum, and no move in this direction has been made. Thus, the present Chamber, which at times appears overfull, must expand to accommodate four more members. How can this be done?

At present there are forty double settees in the House, each accommodating two members, and two single seats of similar design (of which the Social Credit leader, Mr Cracknell, occupies one). These are arranged in three curving lines, facing inwards towards the central table.

The capacious settees so fill the Chamber that some of the heavier-set members are not prepared to essay the narrow passageway between the steam-heaters and the rows of back benches. This air of crowding is quite illusory. The total capacity of the double and single settees is 82, even though they are never occupied by more than 79 members. The Speaker is either in his own separate chair, or out of the Chamber. His deputy, the Chairman of Committees takes the Speaker’s place at that time. Therefore, the Chamber already has three spare seats (or four when the Speaker is absent, or when the House is in Committee). This seems to dispose of the suggestion, contained in the interim report of the Committee on Standing Orders, that the Bar of the House might have to be eliminated in order to make room for extra members.

If the two single settees were replaced by double ones, and if the rear quadrants of cross-benches were moved around a shade, there would be 84 seats available—which would still leave a spare one as the symbolic home of Mr Speaker, otherwise accommodated on his throne.

It is to be hoped the Select Committee realises this, and that the two rows of spectator seats behind the Bar of the House are preserved. There is some sympathy for the plea that women may enter this now-masculine preserve and sit among the guests there.

Trade Expansion Though Government departments have been asked to curb their spending, the pressure so far has probably fallen lightest on the trade survey programmes being carried out from New Zealand's 23 overseas trade posts. “We have to make the programme fit our allocations," commented a senior officer of the Department of Industries and Commerce, “but I can assure you that any cuts we have had to make in the trade survey programmes either in progress or envisaged have been very light.” The programmes are planned by the trade commissioners at the various posts, and are submitted to Wellington for confirmation and further suggestion. All available evidence indicates that New Zealand offices abroad are working at top pressure to increase the awareness of New Zealand by other countries, and to improve trade opportunities. This was indicated in Parliament recently by the Minister of Overseas Trade (Mr Marshall) when asked whether, in view of the changed position in Indonesia, an attempt would be made to advance New Zealand trade interests there. Mr Marshall was able to report that already the New Zealand Trade Commissioner in Singapore had been to Indonesia, and had made a preliminary trade survey last March. A closer study was now being made, in relation to the change in government and the recent economic crisis in Indonesia. He was able to assure the House that New Zealand was making every attempt to re-enter the Indonesian market. Surveys In Europe A recent London message Indicates that New Zealand trade surveys will be carried out in both Eastern and Western European countries throughout 1967-68. Czechoslovakia has already been visited. Switzerland, which is now taking a considerable quantity of New Zealand lamb, is under studv. Future surveys will be made in Eire (June), Finland (August), Austria (September), Poland (October), and Spain and Portugal (either November or February). Overseas Trade headquarters in Wellington has a list of projects in many other countries, and suggestions go out regularly. When a trade representative is about to visit a country, advice is given to any commercial firms who might be interested in on-the-spot negotiations.