Holden Republic has an interesting post waying up the pros and cons of bringing back the Upper House. The post also takes a look at Doug Graham's proposal back in the early 1990s to establish a Senate, which I would totally disagree with.
I have favoured for some time New Zealand having an upper house, mainly to slow down the pace of parliament, allow for greater input from the people, and make it more difficult for a government to make far-reaching changes without more widespread support.
Specifically I would like a Senate that is smaller than the House of Representatives (not sure on numbers but probably around 60), elected proportionally, and have half the seats up for re-election every 3 years (similar to the Australian Senate).
In addition, the government would not require the confidence of the Senate to operate, and the Senate would not have any say on Revenue or Appropriation bills (basically to avoid the Australian Constitutional Crisis of 1975). The Senate should also be bound by the Salisbury Convention - i.e. it does not oppose a government bill implementing a measure clearly promised in their election manifesto.
However, I doubt this has widespread support as I doubt New Zealanders want more policitians, and I can't see it being too popular with either National or Labour, as it would drastically reduce their power while they are in government.
I have favoured for some time New Zealand having an upper house, mainly to slow down the pace of parliament, allow for greater input from the people, and make it more difficult for a government to make far-reaching changes without more widespread support.
Specifically I would like a Senate that is smaller than the House of Representatives (not sure on numbers but probably around 60), elected proportionally, and have half the seats up for re-election every 3 years (similar to the Australian Senate).
In addition, the government would not require the confidence of the Senate to operate, and the Senate would not have any say on Revenue or Appropriation bills (basically to avoid the Australian Constitutional Crisis of 1975). The Senate should also be bound by the Salisbury Convention - i.e. it does not oppose a government bill implementing a measure clearly promised in their election manifesto.
However, I doubt this has widespread support as I doubt New Zealanders want more policitians, and I can't see it being too popular with either National or Labour, as it would drastically reduce their power while they are in government.
Comments
Thanks for your comments. You're right, the Nats / Labourites won't stand for it, the best way of confronting the issue of Parliament's powers is to reform the procedures that are - in my view at least - far too rushed at present; one example being the rules of 'urgency'.
Yes, we definately need to change the rules on urgency. It seems to be a bit of a problem that a 50% vote can basically overturn some of the consitutional safeguards in the system (such as question time).