THE REPRESENTATION BILL.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume VII, Issue 382, 13 August 1880, Page 14

THE REPRESENTATION BILL.

It is difficult to see what is the real object of the Eepresentation Bill of the Hall Government. Its ostensible object is the redress of the inequalities of the present system of representation. But it is now evident that the Government does not propose to abate the nuisance of small constituencies, and equalise representation. The constituencies about which most complaint is made are to remain untouched under the new bill, and inequality generally is to be maintained. New Plymouth, for example, with a population of 2680, and Egmont with a population of 2962 are each to return a member of Parliament, whilst Coromandel, with a population of 60y8, and Christchurch South, with its 6750 inhabitants, are to return also one member each. Again, Wanganui electorate, having only 7215 inhabitants shall, it is proposed, return two members, whilst Te Aroha, which has 7546, shall send only one represenatative to Parliament. These are specimens of the proposals of the new bill generally. It fails, therefore, in proposing a redress of the grievance of the inequality of representation, which is so much complained of. But this is not the only blot in the bill. It also proposes to increase the number of representatives from 84 to i) 0. This is a monstrous proposition. The number of members of the House of Representatives is already a great deal too large, considering the amount of the population of the colony and its resources at present. There is no country in the world so numerously represented at this moment as New Zealand. Even Victoria, which after New Zealand is the worst governed colony we know of, has in proportion to her population only half the number of representatives of New Zealand. At present, for a population of 450,000, New Zealand has 84 representatives. Victoria, for a population 915,000, has only the same number or thereabouts. In considering this question it must not be forgotten that increased representation means largely increased expenditure. How, under such circumstances, a Ministry engaged in retrenchment all round, could propose to add to the present number of our representatives is not intelligible. If the Government had proposed to retrench the number of Members of Parliament one could understand its policy : and this is what should have been done. Fifty members are quite enough for New Zealand ; that is one representative for each ten thousand of the inhabitants. But we suppose it would be idle to propose such retrenchment. Hon. members could not be found who would retrench themselves and the honorarium. Well, if so, why, however, add to the number which is now unnecessary, and vastly too great ?

These are not the only objections we have to the new Representation Bill. Unicorn constituences may in some instances be a necessity, but they should not be adopted as the rule. At least the proposal of the Government is an experiment, and one of very doubtful success. It appears to us that it is more likely to shut out minorities from all influence on legislation than otherwise, and consequently more likely than the present system to work very serious injustice. The more we consider this question the more thoroughly convinced do we become that of all systems of representation Hare's is the most equitable. If fifty members were returned according to his plan, all sections, every class of the community, would be fairly represented, and the work of legislation would, most probably, be done in a satisfactory manner. Then we should probably have none of these useless and mischievous commissions which have scandalised us all of late, and put the country to useless expense, presenting at the same time exhibitions of prejudice, ignorance, and temper for which the people are veiy unwilling indeed to pay. Then we should most likely have men of mark, of intelligence and experience in Parliament, who would insist on Government doing its own proper work, and doing it well, to the credit and happiness of Ministers themselves, who would no longer find themselves under the necessity of altering well considered measures, or framing their bills, in order to win the support of men or localities in pursuit of their own selfish ends.