It is possible that a 4-year term could strike a better balance between ensuring government is able to pass quality legislation while also being sufficiently accountable to the electorate.
However, given the relative lack of checks and balances on the power of the executive in New Zealand’s constitutional framework, an extension of the parliamentary term to 4 years would only be acceptable if stronger checks were put on the power of government. In our view the “proportionality requirement” proposed by this Bill is not a sufficient counterweight.
The NZCTU would therefore only support holding a referendum on the parliamentary term if further, stronger checks are put on the power of the government as the price for a 4-year term. In the absence of additional checks, the balance between governance capacity and democratic accountability would be skewed dangerously towards the former.