I’ve been thinking a bit recently about the whole MMP referendum and our options for reform. I’m of the view that MMP has delivered greater representation of society and more consultative government. This has been at the expensive of electorate-specific accountability for MPs and the ability of Governments to enact the manifestos they’re elected on; and a lot of tail-wags-the-dog horse trading that ensures bad policy making.
Essentially what we have is a single chamber Parliament with MPs elected in FPP contests in electorate, and behind-closed-doors party lists. The most worrying aspect of MMP is the continued lack of oversight when it comes to legislation, particularly when it’s rammed through under urgency. New Zealand ought to have an upper house, along the lines of the Australian or Irish Senates, offering proper legislative oversight. We’ve already got the facilities for it (a whole chamber in Parliament set aside since the 50s).
To meet these competing requirements, I propose:
- House of Representatives with 99 MPs, elected by STV every 3 years
- Senate (upper house) with 30 members elected every 4 years
- Senators elected nationally by proportional vote and no threshold (in affect, a 3.33% threshold) from open party lists.
- Senate has the ability to reject any Bill of the House of Representatives, except Bills of Money and Supply (that is, Governments are formed and dismissed by the House of Representatives not the Senate)
I think this solution not only balances the need for representation, but also legislative oversight and stable government with the ability to implement its manifesto promises.
Thoughts?


