The Press FRIDAY, MARCH 7. 1975. Drawing ward boundaries

Press, Volume CXV, Issue 33786, 7 March 1975, Page 12

The Press FRIDAY, MARCH 7. 1975. Drawing ward boundaries

Last year, for the first time for more than half a century voters in Christchurch elected a city council under a ward system At the polls, the ward system made voting simpler Voters were no longer required to select enough names to fill all the seats on the council from a confusingly long list of candidates Between elections, individual citizens should be finding it easier to approach the individual councillors who represent the ward in which they 'ive with grievances or suggestions This may make it easier for a councillor who gives diligent attention to his constituents to build an independent political base. But the " parties” will not be superseded entirely because of the ward system, and it would be undesirable if thev were

The ward boundaries have proved generally satisfactory The electorate gave the Citizens' Association a comfortable majority, in spite of the association's fears that the boundaries had been drawn to Labour's advantage. But the success or failure of particular candidates should not inspire the endorsement or acceptance of the ward system. The bounoaries will almost certainly have to be changed some time >n the future as the populations of different areas of the citv grow or decline, and the exercise should ho free of political bias. The system laid down in the Municipal Cornorations Act for drawing ward boundaries gives councils the responsibility for deciding where the boundaries should run. But the principle that politicians should not fix electoral boundaries is firmh established in national politics and it is a matter for regret that the new Local Government Act did not establish an independent authority to fix ward boundaries i.i the local body regions which will probably be established in the next few vears Provided that the balance between population and the number of councillors in each ward is kent constant and provided that each ward is

a reasonable comnact geographical area, opportunities for gerrvmandering will be limited. If wards, like countv ridings, had their own accounting systems and rating assessments, drawing their boundaries would have greater significance for individual city ratepayers. But so long as wards exist only for electoral convenience and to encourage closer contact between voters and their representatives, the question is not likely to become controversial.

When the boundaries are changed, discussion about whether the central business district should be a separate ward can be exnected. The issue may not be worth raising at all. There seems to be no good reason to depart from a system which allocates seats on the council according to population rather than according to the contributions which the various parts of the citv make to the council's finances. If the ward svstem resulted in the election of councillors who did no more than fight for the parochial interests of their own ward, rather than taking a city-wide view of the questions which come before the council, it would not be worth maintaining. The interest of large numbers of people throughout the city in what the council does, or fails to do, in the central business area is a sufficient guarantee that that area's interests will not be disregarded. And all councillors must share their concern.