Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone
The Green Party says it backs the idea of a four-year Parliamentary term, but with caveats.
Co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick told Morning Report the Green Party is interested in the proposal put forward by the government on Thursday.
"We, in principle, are very interested in the proposal," Swarbrick said.
The Independent Electoral Review recommended a referendum on whether the country adds an extra year.
"We would, again, agree broadly in principal on that," Swarbrick said. "But I need to point out the caveat that we have not fully engaged with the legislation, which has, obviously, only dropped [on Thursday]
"As I understand that has a few differences to what the incoming prime minister put on the table under a members bill, and we are yet to discuss that as a Caucus.
"As far as the principal goes, we do support that broader reform."
The coalition announced on Thursday it would introduce legislation to extend the term from three years to four, subject to a referendum, with all three parties supporting it to a select committee.
The legislation will have a caveat, designed by the ACT Party as part of its coalition deal, that the term would only extend to four years if there were greater checks and balances on the government of the day.
It would mean three years remained the standard term of Parliament, but each time a new government was elected it would decide whether to next hold an election in another three or four years' time.
National and New Zealand First's support is only guaranteed through to select committee.
A select committee would decide on the details of the referendum that would happen if the legislation was passed.
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said any decision on extending the maximum parliamentary term to four years is up to voters.
He said he is personally in favour of a change because it gives governments more time to get things done.
Meanwhile, Labour Party leader Chris Hipkins said he was in favour of four-year terms.
"I think a four-year term would actually allow the government of the day to slow down a bit, and make sure they're doing things properly rather than them doing them in a hurry so that they've got something to show at the next election," he said.
However, Swarbrick said the government should be looking at all recommendations of the electoral review, which includes lowering the voting age to 16.
"We have quite a problem in this country with how our Parliament tends to only reflect and cherry pick certain recommendations out of reports and kick the can down the role on things that might be considered controversial," she said.
There were two previous referendums on four year terms, one in 1967 and one in 1990, however, both were defeated by more than two-third majorities.
University of Otago law professor Andrew Geddis told Morning Report there has been a small number of opinion polling done since those referendums that indicates the public may be more open to those terms.
"The danger I can see is people just becoming a bit sick of politics and a bit sick of having to go to the polls and going 'you know what, just give them another year', " he said.
"That would be the worst reason to do this."
Prof Geddis said if we take it to referendum, he said there would need to be a really good education campaign to inform voters on why it matters.
