'Business leaders putting out for a four-year Parliamentary term is consistent with their earlier anti-MMP stance,' says
electoral commentator Dr Philip Temple. 'Less democratic choice and accountability for the general public. Other
parliamentary systems that have four or five year terms all have second houses to second guess the quality of government
legislation.'
'The constitutional review will no doubt look at this question. But the introduction of a four-year term should come
along with basic safeguards, such as fixed election dates, no possibility for snap elections at the whim of individual
prime ministers, and a system of constructive votes of no confidence if a government cannot continue during the fixed
term.'
Dr Temple says, 'Any proposed changes to the parliamentary term should be considered in conjunction with changes to MMP
that the Electoral Commission will recommend after its review next year. The electoral system and parliamentary term
provisions are interlocked. The final proposal must be put to a referendum.'
Dr Philip Temple has been researching and writing about electoral reform issues, both here and overseas, for more than
20 years. He has been given a Wallace Award by the Electoral Commission for his 'significant contribution to public
understanding of electoral matters'.