David Seymour wanted four-year terms only when the government decided to hand over control of select committees to the opposition. Photo: RNZ / Mark Papalii
David Seymour admits his approach to a four-year term was too complicated, but says people are unlikely to vote for it unless the government puts new limits on its own powers.
The Justice Select Committee on Monday released its report on Seymour's bill, recommending some of the more contentious provisions be scrapped.
These included that a incoming government would only get four years if it agreed to basically give the opposition a majority on all select committees. This would have meant some governments lasting three years, others lasting four.
Committee chair Andrew Bayly told RNZ that would have been too complicated.
"It should be a clear choice, 'should it be three years or four years' - so that no one has the uncertainty of when they go to their ballot box of wondering 'well, I wonder if it's going to be a three- or four-year term depending on how Parliament subsequently decides ... immediately following the election, what they want to do'."
He said it would also have significant concerns for local government, with councils very strongly believing local and central government elections should not happen in the same year, which a variable term of Parliament would inevitably lead to.
Labour leader Chris Hipkins told Morning Report, he supported a four-year term and more safeguards for what governments can and can't do.
"We do need to make sure bills are going before select committees, we do need to make sure there's robust scrutiny of government decision-making.
"It's ironic David Seymour argues for all of these things for everybody else but not for him."
Having proposed the legislation, ACT is now the only party in Parliament opposed to a four-year term - saying it must be balanced by additional checks and balances on the government's power.
Seymour said most other countries with a longer term also had more of those limits on the government's power.
"We have no written constitution, no upper house, we have no states or provincial government - we just have that one Parliament," he said.
"I actually have listened, and I accept some of the criticism the select committee has put forward. The way that it was initially proposed is too complex, however, we've made a counter proposal that is much simpler."
He said the revised idea was to bring in a permanent four-year term if backed in a referendum, but it would only take effect once select committees were made independent.
"I will now be putting to my colleagues right across the parliament, that we need a four-year term. We need more sober and sensible law making, but it wouldn't be right to do it - and I don't believe the New Zealand people will vote for it in a referendum - unless there's some other new check and balance added."
Committee chair Andrew Bayly. Photo: RNZ / Reece Baker
However, when Bayly was asked if the committee had considered an approach that would bring in select committee changes without the variability, he pleaded powerlessness.
"We had to deal with the bill as it came through to us ... the committee was of a view that a lot of that change in around select committees, constitution, is actually Parliament's role.
"You can't have a justice select committee of one Parliament setting the parameters for all future parliaments into infinity."
So instead, the committee referred a proposals for limiting the power of the executive - that is, the government and its ministers - to the standing orders committee, whose role it is to review Parliament's rules and consider changes.
Seymour said he supported that approach, regardless of whether the four-year term was involved. However, he would not support a four-year term without new checks on the government's power.
"I think it would be better to say the deal here is a four-year term with additional checks and balances," he told First Up.
"I think it would lead to better lawmaking but also be far more likely to succeed in the necessary referendum where people will be asked 'trust us a year longer'."
Otago University law professor Andrew Geddis was of a similar view, but argued another problem with ACT's proposed approach to select committees was the system could be manipulated.
"There were too many ways that could then be gamed by a government to get their four years, and then get control of select committee back," he said.
"Changing standing orders to allow for greater opposition control and to allow the opposition more of a say in how the House works - that is a good idea, and it's a better way to do it."
He agreed the public would be less likely to support a four-year term without some controls on the government.
"New Zealand's executive is already too powerful," he said.
"If those changes aren't made, then the public are going to in essence be asked to give governments a whole extra year in power with no extra controls placed on how to use that power - and that could be a fairly hard sell to the public.
"I think the changes that the select committee have suggested are good ones. They're what I recommended, so of course then I tend to agree with them."
He said he was in favour of a four-year term if there were more limits on the government's power, because the three-year cycle was quite short and made it hard for governments to plan for the long term, and implement changes effectively.
Seymour - who as Deputy Prime Minister and holder of five portfolios is one of the most powerful members of the executive - brushed off questions about whether his approach would be undermining his own powers.
"I'm first and foremost a New Zealander. I intend to live for at least another 50 years and I don't plan to be working in the Beehive for another 50 years. I'm thinking about in the long term what is for the good of New Zealand," he said.
Bayly said the committee was not set on a specific date for a referendum, "but we were clear that at some point a referendum should be held".
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
