A MUCH-GOVERNED COUNTRY

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXII, Issue 21999, 4 January 1935, Page 8

A MUCH-GOVERNED COUNTRY

New Zealand is a country in which governing and controlling bodies flourish greatly. Thi'S fact is illustrated by an article published yesterday, showing the number of occasions the citizen will be called upon during the coming year to cast a vote. True, there is only one Parliament in. New Zealand, compared with seven in Australia. But what New Zealand misses, or escapes, in the Parliamentary field i's more than made up by the multiplicity of local bodies. This feature of the country's life was discussed in some detail by the National Expenditure Commission. The report of this body not only catalogued the many authorities by which local government is conducted, it sketched their origin and growth. As it says,, "generally speaking the system was inaugurated in 1876 upon the abolition of the Provincial Councils." It is a significant sentence. The spirit which insisted in those long-distant days, that too much authority should not be vested in a single institution sitting in Wellington, can lie heard speaking to-day when any proposal for altering, even for reforming, the complicated and overlapping system of local government is advanced. There was more reason in 187(5 for regarding too much centralisation as a tendency to be resisted. Distances were great, communications were primitive*, there was no continuity of population and little community of interest between more or less isolated groups of settlers. Many changes have been seen since then, but the division of functions between central and local authorities flourishes, with the many additional elaborations. The National Expenditure Commission said very emphatically that the time for a general overhaul had come. It quoted significant figures to support its attitude on the score of cost alone. The situation was met characteristically by the proposal that a commission of inquiry should investigate. This alone meant delay, but since no commission has iDecn appointed, though the report appeared in 1932, the delay has been intensified. As this is the year of a Parliamentary election, it is probably too much to ''expect that it will witness any action ; but presently the pressure of cost, as well as clumsiness, may force New Zealand to face the issue of its own over-government.