Having spent my political life in Local Government I could bore you silly with stories of how the "executive" type politicians we have in Parliament, of all political colours, abuse local potential and community partnerships which would allow much more productive outcomes. Too many of the decisions made by Central Governments, and their bureaucracies, just don't work on the ground. The recent Royal Commission on Abuse in Care challenges us to completely rethink our state structures and service delivery. Will local solutions be considered by those focused on increasingly centralized solutions; I doubt it. If we are to have an upper house the other two houses need to also be completely reviewed.
That’s probably right although I’m suggesting representatives from across the community rather than a rest home for retired politicians but I take your point.
Really, we had a second chamber before 1951. Generally, the rule was that the voters would vote in opposition members to the governing party which hamstrung the Government - such as in the 1951 Watersiders Strike. It was widely unpopular and seen as a retirement bonus for politicians. At the 1951 snap election, when offered an option of a one chamber house, voters jumped at the chance. I cannot see a second chamber solving any problems. Just look at the issues in Australia or Canda where the second chambers hamstring the Government. I quite like a one chamber system and it fits with the size of our population.
And Harvard is a very good place for some of our former MPs. If the Americans are willing to pay for it it’s a win/win. We don’t have to listen to them and it costs us nothing. Can someone put Bolger and Palmer in touch with Harvard?
There are definitely trade-offs. It would slow progress on some issues and it could also become a sinecure for retired politicians like happens elsewhere. The benefits might however outweigh these negatives.
Having spent my political life in Local Government I could bore you silly with stories of how the "executive" type politicians we have in Parliament, of all political colours, abuse local potential and community partnerships which would allow much more productive outcomes. Too many of the decisions made by Central Governments, and their bureaucracies, just don't work on the ground. The recent Royal Commission on Abuse in Care challenges us to completely rethink our state structures and service delivery. Will local solutions be considered by those focused on increasingly centralized solutions; I doubt it. If we are to have an upper house the other two houses need to also be completely reviewed.
I’m sure that’s correct. Yes, an upper house might be one improvement but it’s not the only area where changes should be made.
Regardless of the merits or otherwise of your suggestion, the chances New Zealanders would agree to supporting another 100 politicians is near zero.
That’s probably right although I’m suggesting representatives from across the community rather than a rest home for retired politicians but I take your point.
Really, we had a second chamber before 1951. Generally, the rule was that the voters would vote in opposition members to the governing party which hamstrung the Government - such as in the 1951 Watersiders Strike. It was widely unpopular and seen as a retirement bonus for politicians. At the 1951 snap election, when offered an option of a one chamber house, voters jumped at the chance. I cannot see a second chamber solving any problems. Just look at the issues in Australia or Canda where the second chambers hamstring the Government. I quite like a one chamber system and it fits with the size of our population.
And Harvard is a very good place for some of our former MPs. If the Americans are willing to pay for it it’s a win/win. We don’t have to listen to them and it costs us nothing. Can someone put Bolger and Palmer in touch with Harvard?
There are definitely trade-offs. It would slow progress on some issues and it could also become a sinecure for retired politicians like happens elsewhere. The benefits might however outweigh these negatives.