New Zealand Executive Government Speech Archive

FRIDAY 24 MAY 1996

OPENING ADDRESS

RT HON J B BOLGER

PRIME MINISTER THE CONSTITUTIONAL IMPLICATIONS OF MMP

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL CHAMBER, WELLINGTON

I am delighted to welcome you all here today, to the newly refurbished Parliament Buildings, and to open what promises to be a most interesting conference. I am sorry I cannot stay to listen to the discussion, but you will understand if, the morning after the budget, I have other engagements to attend. Refurbishing the buildings was the easy part.

We are still in the middle of refurbishing the rules under which politics and the business of government are conducted, in this unique transition period from one electoral system to another. Over the past two and a half years I have led a Government that has moved from a single party majority, to a coalition majority, to a coalition minority, to a coalition majority again, and now we have with coalition partners 49 members which is exactly 50 per cent of a 98-member House.

We also most often get the support of Trevor Rodgers, leader of the Conservative Party and Independent Ross Meurant. Some weeks it's been hard to keep track. But throughout this period of dramatic political change, stable government has continued. Yesterday's budget was a clear example of a Government in action. We have shown that multi-party governments and minority governments - in some circumstances - can work.

The new style of government obviously requires greater consultation, and imposes different disciplines on all members. Less confrontation means more progress. What is not widely known outside Parliament is that a large proportion of the legislation that is considered by the House is not contentious in any party political sense. It is considered by the House and, in particular, by select committees in a non-partisan and practical way. The new electoral and political environment may help to make that practical reality more apparent.

One of the key tasks for me, as Prime Minister, is to continue to manage a smooth transition as New Zealand moves towards its first MMP election. It is important that I, and other party leaders, act in a constitutionally informed and responsible fashion. For me, this involves two distinct roles. On the one hand, I am the leader of a political party. In that capacity after the election on the 12th October, it may well be necessary for me to engage in a process of negotiation with other party leaders to form the next Government.

On the other hand, I am also the Prime Minister, and the leader of the current Government. I therefore have a responsibility to ensure that government is conducted over the election period in accordance with the various conventions and other constitutional requirements. For example, if the election outcome is unclear it may be necessary for me to determine that the government will conduct itself in accordance with the convention on caretaker government until the situation is clarified.

If the situation remains unclear for some time, I may need to call Parliament at an earlier stage than might otherwise have been required, in an attempt to clarify the situation. There are also of course the various constitutional procedures associated with the transfer of power between administrations which require action by the Prime Minister. But may I suggest that you also, as academics and commentators, have an important task. The potential uncertainty following the next election will be significantly reduced if commentators and others are clear on the established principles, and can describe what must happen next.

So one of the key tasks - for you - is to write and comment in an informed and responsible fashion. You can help ensure that there is some public understanding of the relevant principles. That is one reason why I welcome this conference today. It is encouraging to see that you are undertaking this role and are engaged in serious debate. Looking through the programme for the next two days, I see a thorough coverage of the issues, and an authoritative array of speakers.

We do of course already have strong and flexible procedures and principles which will help us deal with many of the situations of interest. But their application in new contexts still merits discussion. The implications for Parliament is of course an appropriate place to begin. It is there that the effect of change is being felt most immediately. It is there that we are having to learn to work with new party configurations. It is from the changes in Parliament that the changes for the political executive will flow.

The nature of the relationship between the executive and the House has changed. We must therefore consult more, both within government, between the coalition partners, and outside government with other parties in the Parliament. If the consultation does not produce a sufficient level of support, the Government must sometimes put aside its plans for a time.

Or to take a real life example, the Government's proposal to have New Zealand's final Court of Appeal here in New Zealand by removing the option of appealing to the Privy Council in London. Thus far opposition parties agree that the necessary legislation should be introduced but have yet to commit themselves to support it. Here again the Government and Parliament are operating in new territory.

For here the Government has chosen to proceed even though the level of support is not clear, and take its chances in the House on the day. Most of the time this has not been necessary as it has proved possible to talk through the issues and to progress legislative measures in a sensible fashion. Politicians and commentators alike are getting used to the fact that the Government continues to function effectively, even though it may not get its way on every issue before the House.

The changes for the public service are one step further removed again, and are more diffuse. For officials, the nature of the task has not changed. They serve the Government of the day - ministers. But the context in which ministers operate has changed, and so the context in which public servants work has also changed. In particular, their contact with political parties outside government increases. I know that a considerable amount of work is being done to ensure that public servants are well armed with guidance on appropriate conduct in all of these circumstances.

No doubt you will hear more of this work in some of today's addresses. The programme also, rightly I think, has a separate session devoted to discussion of the role of political parties. In the past, political parties have sometimes been regarded as shadowy figures, not mentioned in any of the formal laws on elections, or given any explicit role. One thing that the new electoral system clearly does is acknowledge the importance of political parties in our democracy. It is the parties because they put up the candidates that provide the link between the people and the Parliament, and therefore also the link with government.

It is through political candidates that participation begins. Political parties have had to reflect on their role in the process and their place in the political spectrum over the last year or two. New parties have been formed to try and stake out a slice of the political action but they also have to follow the rules. The requirement for democratic processes in candidate selection, and the need to develop a party list of candidates, have also opened up selection procedures around the country and encouraged greater interest and participation.

It is to be hoped that this work will in time bear fruit in the form of greater confidence in the wider political system. Your programme also includes two larger matters: the Treaty implications of the electoral changes, and the republic debate. On the latter, it is well known that I have said on a number of occasions that I think it is important for us, as a nation, to ask questions about ourselves and our constitutional and social institutions. This type of occasion is an important part of that national process of reflection and deliberation.

Whether these debates result in change now, next year, or at some point in the future, is not critical. What is important is that as New Zealand continues to grow, we develop our own sense of national identity and define our place in the world. The Treaty implications of the move to MMP, which are closely related to the wider constitutional concerns voiced by Maori, raise similarly wide and basic issues about national direction and identity. In the passage to the adoption of MMP, there was naturally extensive debate about Maori representation in the national Parliament.

After extensive consultation, particularly at the select committee stage of the legislation, it became clear that Maori favoured retaining the Maori seats, and subjecting any Maori party to the same threshold as all other parties in the general election contest. Based on the current size of the Maori roll, Maori are certainly guaranteed at least five seats in the House. As well as the traditional general roll seats where Maori can stand for election, the party lists of candidates provide another opportunity for individual political parties to promote their own Maori candidates in a way that was not previously possible.

The House will benefit from more Maori members, and I hope that it eventuates. You can see that these issues very quickly take you back to the wider questions of how to ensure Maori have an appropriate voice in the Parliament and in the Government. For this Government, we have said that we will consider this issue within a framework of some basic givens. For example, we have said that there must be a single national Parliament, a House which represents all New Zealanders. The Treaty emphasises partnership within a single state, not secession.

But the way in which national sovereignty is exercised is not always a matter of absolutes. We can be creative in how Parliament delegates authority, and in how to ensure Maori voices are heard and heeded in government. Within this broad framework, we are endeavouring to listen to the concerns being aired by Maori, and to respond in a considered fashion. I turn again to the conference agenda. One of your final sessions is the implications for the budget process.

As part of government that has just introduced its budget into the House, it may be that I should make sure we have a Minister here for that discussion tomorrow afternoon. You may have some pointers for how we should take the budget safely through the House! More seriously, having clear procedures for bringing the annual budget together are essential if it is not to develop into a race to see who can spend the taxpayer's money the fastest. An aging the budget process will be critical to ensuring New Zealand gets sound government under MMP. Finally, may I say again that I take great pleasure in opening this conference today. The topics are timely, and they are significant. I hope that your discussions are fruitful.
ends

Home || Ministers || Policies || Speeches || Departments