FIJI POLITICS

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXIII, Issue 22493, 10 August 1936, Page 6

FIJI POLITICS

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL A COMPROMISE ADOPTED [from oub ottn correspondent] SUVA, July 22 A decision, which has been described by the Secretary of State for the Colonies as a compromise, has been arrived at regarding the constitution of the Fiji Legislative Council. Previously the European and Indian unofficial members were elected by European and Indian electors respectively under a communal system. It was proposed by the Government that this bo abolished and that all European and Indian members be nominated by the Governor. The Fijian members are selected by the Council of Chiefs and the Governor, and no alteration was proposed. In his despatch the Secretary of State announces that it is proposed to reduce the number of European elected members from six to three, and there will also be two nominated unofficial members. Thefe will be three elected Indian members and two nominated Indian members. Instead of throe Fijian nominated members there will be five. Although this is described as a compromise it is generally regarded as a .victory for the elective principle, inasmuch as the Secretary of State has stated that he could not see his way to decide that elective principles be dispensed with altogether for Europeans or Indians. The proposal to abolish the ielective principles caused considerable protest, and in addition to petitions Bent to England by Europeans and Indians, two elected members, the Hon. Alport Baker and Hon. J. P. Bayly, proceeded to London to place their ,views before the Secretary of State.

Referring to this compromise the Secretary of State said: "I am confident that it is l the desire of all communities in Fiji that political peace be restored [with the least possible delay and that B settlement be conceived in the spirit that the interests of the Colony bo placed before those of any one section of the population." lu regard to previous agitations by sections <>f the Indian community for a common roll, he said that he was in full agreement with the views expressed by Mr. Amery in 192-j that the circumstances of Fiji and in particular the nature of the organisation of the native inhabitants ami the position in which the Crown stands to them are such as to make it impossible to arrange for the representation of three sections of the population 011 the Legislative Council by means of a general franchise. The fear that the Indian communityV recpiest lor a common roll, or general franchise, might be granted by some future Government, and which might give them political ascendancy. was stated by supporters of the proposal for a system of nomination to be the reason why they desired the abolition of the elective principle. Supporters of the elective principle contended that a general franchise would not be granted by any political party in England while the organisation of the native race remained as at present, and which was likely to remain for tnanv years.