Experiment in
p. 20 · Read in the full issue
Opinion
Experiment in parliamentary democracy
This is an historic election year in New Zealand and about 20-odd
political parties are beginning to
woo voter support in the hope of winning a say in the next government.
Historic because after 140 years of
Westminster-style, first-past-the post elec
tions, this country will have its first poll with a new voting system called Mixed Member Proportional (MMP).
The system, used in Germany since the end of World War 11, will increase the number of MPs from 99 to at least 120 and is supposed to be fairer, in that, it will give minor parties more chance of getting rep resentatives elected to Parliament.
It will end the monopoly on power the National and Labour parties have enjoyed for nearly six decades and almost certainly produce a new era of coalition govern ments. With no one party likely to have enough MPs to govern single-handed, minority communities and interests should have an influential voice in Parliament for the first time in two generations.
That at least is the theory. Whether it turns out that way when New Zealand’s new experiment in parliamentary democ racy is actually underway remains to be seen. No section of New Zealand society has more at stake in this new political envi ronment than the Pacific island communi ty, which has had a lone voice in Parliament in the form of opposition Labour MP Taito Phillip Field - and he only for the past two years.
The 170,000-plus, according to the lat est 1991 census. Pacific island people liv ing here have been sadly under-represent ed in Parliament, given they account for about five per cent of the population.
As a predominantly young community - half of them are under 20 - and as one of the fastest-growing in the country, they need more MPs of their own and they need more representatives willing to argue for
their interests.
For they remain the most under-privi leged and disadvantaged section of New Zealand society. Their current unemploy ment rate stays around the 17 per cent mark, the highest of the country’s three major ethnic groups, and nearly half the community’s teenagers are jobless.
The median income of the total Pacific island population is less than half the pake ha average and they figure disproportion ately badly in other economic, health and social welfare indicators.
Because they are largely unskilled and tend to work mainly in the manufacturing sector, they have found it more difficult than most other New Zealanders to recov er from the dramatic effects of the coun try’s post-1984 economic restructuring.
The National Party government, which naturally wants to regain power (or a major share of it), will campaign this year on the strength of an economic recovery.
The indicators are undeniable. After 15 years of growth up to 1990 averaging 1.5 per cent a year, well down on the Western world’s average, New Zealand is now on the rise.
Inflation, which plagued the country throughout the 1970’s and 1980’s, has been pegged below the government’s two per cent annual target.
The economy is into its fourth year of growth, having expanded by five to six per cent in each of the past two years. This was clearly not sustainable and it has slowed to a predicted 2.3 per cent for the year ending next month.
But analysts have predicted a rise to more than three per cent next year and nearly five per cent in 1998 - all good news for the National Party government.
Much of this increase will be attributed to election sweetener income tax cuts announced by Finance Minister Bill Birch just before Christmas. Birch is in the envi
able position of having sizeable and grow ing budget surpluses to start getting rid of in an election year.
Actual details will not be revealed until this month, but he has made it clear it will not be a one-off cut, holding out the prospect of a number of reductions in tax rates over the next few years.
“New Zealanders pay too much tax,”
Birch says. And we all say “Hear, hear” to that.
The question is: How will all this help the Pacific island community?
Birch says his cuts will be aimed at lower to middle income earners, which should assist the majority of the islands workers in that category.
But they won’t do anything for the nearly one-in-five Pacific islanders who don’t have a job and therefore have no income to pay tax on.
The minister replies that reducing taxes will improve economic growth, create more jobs and make it more attractive for people to move from welfare to work.
This last point is critical, for the 1991 census showed that more than half Pacific island male adults and two-thirds of the women were receiving some form of income support from the government.
Commentators here say unemployment and poverty have now become structural features of New Zealand life. In no section of the population is that more true than in the Pacific island community.
That is why it is imperative the islands
people take advantage of the political
changes to get a bigger say in Parliament.
But they will have to do it themselves.
It is unlikely others will wage their cam paign for them.
And at this stage, there is little sign of Pacific island candidates rushing to stand for Parliament.
This year, as never before, their future in this country is in their hands. ■