USE OF PARLIAMENTARY PAIRING

Chronicle (Levin), 8 July 1947, Page 4

USE OF PARLIAMENTARY PAIRING

THE Parliamentary practice of "pairing," which in view of the Labour Government's slender majority-— accentuated by the absence through illness of Mr. A. S. Richards — and the attitude of the Oppo-sition to any such requests this session, is a live taiking-point. This practice .dates from Cromwell's time.

A member who wishes to absent himself from a division without causing any loss of a vote to his own party, -finds another member of opposite political afflliations, who similarly desires to be absent, and the two agree to "pair" — thatis, to absent themselves when voting takes place. By this mutual agreement a vote is neutralised on either side, and the relative numbers in the division are precisely the same as if both members were present. Members may - -"pair" with each other not only upon particular questions, or for one sitting of Parliament, but also for weeks, or even months. A "pair" is usually consented- to by the Opposition when the Prime Minister or- a Minister of the Crown is abroad on some mission directly concerning the welfare of the country and occupying perhaps most of a Parliamentary year. But this consent does not necessarily 'oflow. Possibly, the most historic occa-

sion in New Zealand's political history when a "pair" was declined was in 1912.^ Mr. Massey then refused a "pair" for Sir (then Mr.) rhomas Wilford, who was absent in England. The Ward Government avoided defeat on Mr. Massey's no-confidence motion by the narrowest possible margin, the' Speaker, Sir Arthur Guinness, in accordance with tradition, giving his casting vote- for the Government of the day after the motion had resulted in a tie. Centuries ago there was an attempt in the House of Commons to abolish "pairing." On March 6, 1743, there was a motion:. "That no- member of this House do presume to make any agreement with another member to absent themselves from any service of this House, or any committee thereof; ind that this House will proceed with the utmost severity against all such members as shall offend therein." The motion, however, was negatived on division.