Government to introduce four-year parliamentary term legislation
The Government will shortly introduce legislation that would, if passed in a referendum, allow a future Government to extend the parliamentary term to four years if it chooses.
However, the bill might not get that far, with Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith saying the coalition agreements only oblige the Government to support the idea to select committee.
Based on an Act Party draft bill, the changes would mean the parliamentary term staying at three years, but with the option of extending to four years if the Government hands over effective control of certain select committees to the Opposition.
This would require not just a law change, but a change to Parliament’s standing orders. Currently, select committee numbers are calculated based on the size of a party’s representation in Parliament, meaning the governing parties have effective control. Critics argue this limits the ability of the committees to scrutinise legislation as Government MPs have little motivation to scrutinise their own side.
Under the proposed change, a Parliament could choose to alter the make-up of certain select committees to the way that questions are allocated in question time. This allocation is based on the proportion of non-executive parliamentary party membership of the House and would mean that in most circumstances, the Government would lose control of committees.
Goldsmith announced the change on Thursday morning.
“The bill is modelled on the Act Party’s draft Constitution (Enabling a Four-Year Term) Amendment Bill. This means a standard term of Parliament will remain at three years, but with the ability to extend the maximum term of Parliament to four years,” Goldsmith said.
“The main condition is that membership of certain select committees is calculated in a way that is proportionate to the non-executive parliamentary party membership of the House,” he said.
Goldsmith added that the change would need to go to a binding referendum given its “constitutional significance”. The bill would also touch on entrenched legislation, meaning that it would require a referendum of a 75% parliamentary majority to change.
Goldsmith said the coalition agreements setting up the Government only stipulated that the bill would go to a select committee.
“At this stage, no decisions have been made on whether the bill will proceed beyond this,” he said.
“Future decisions will also need to be made by the Government as to whether the bill proceeds as introduced, or whether it should be amended.
“We want to hear what New Zealanders think during the select committee process.”
Goldsmith said it was possible a referendum could be held at the 2026 election depending on feedback at select committee.
Labour’s Chris Hipkins said he was in favour of a four-year term and believed holding a referendum was the right way to go.
Whether the bill’s design was the best approach, however, would be something to work through, he said.
“That seems a bit of a convoluted way of doing things,” Hipkins added.
He believed Parliament’s rules and the electoral system should remain separate. He was open to debating ways to increase checks and balances.
Referendums to extend the parliamentary term have twice failed.
Thomas Coughlan is deputy political editor and covers politics from Parliament. He has worked for the Herald since 2021 and has worked in the press gallery since 2018.