Although it pains me to have more politicians, money spent on extra MPs is not that much, even if we add the staff, overheads etc. If it results in more cream rising to cabinet, it may be worth it.

It’s fat free milk actually, the cream are making dollars…mostly overseas.

…and reduces the power of the Executive

Only a 2nd house can curb executive power reasonably effectively & even that may not be enough if there is a will amongst a powerful executive cabal to force through their agenda, they can pretty much do as they please.

As for an increase in numbers of mp’s (deliberately lower case), your proposal to go to 160 of the turds would be about in line with countries of a similar size…Ireland for one. But who really wants more of the lying pig swillers, I doubt there is an optimum parliamentary size, inefficiency generally increases in relation to size increase in most things…pretty sure it would be the same here. Well, not sure, certain!

IS What is needed !!..

All for One… and one for All..

Come on.. I know that there is always one who will disagree..

Untill he needs help..

But who am I to suggest that…

Must have started drinking early )

Par for the course I hear these days )

I will not take offence to any of your ramblings on this subject..

I see that you are in your cups..

Ref. 19.We should not reintroduce reintroduce a second legislative chamber or upper house.

Fuck off !!.. We have more than enough troughers as it is.. I take it you are trying to wind up the populace..

That’s your problem: Under the treaty “we own everything”. Under aboriginal title “we own everything”.
So that makes another option likely…… kick your fat useless arses.

The second problem is that even a good constitution – like the US one that enumerates a small and specific number of state powers – is worthless since that same state gets to pack the Supreme Court with activist judges.

It could do that with a clause which says “English Common Law shall form the basis of this Constitution, except where this Constitution explicitly contradicts it.”

The New Zealand system currently is an elected dictatorship – no Prime Minister in any seriously regarded democracy on earth has as much power as the NZ PM. A constitution would constrain that, and an elected Senate would constrain it even further.

I am also in favour of more MPs, which would yet further weaken Prime Ministerial power. However, I think they should be paid less, as they are here in Texas, where 150 Members of the House are paid $7200 a year to govern 25 million people. You could even go the way of New Hampshire, which has over 400 Representatives. MPs could be paid nothing except the right to claim flights to and from their constituencies, and reasonable expenses.

What I really would like is some integrity in elected politicians – they campaign on issues that get them elected, but are free to vote opposite to their campaign promises when it becomes expedient. We need some automatic recall if an MP reneges on his pre-election promise card.

Apart from that, any moves to abolish Apartheid in New Zealand gets my vote – you can dress it up as nicely as you wish, but reserving privilege based on race is just plain old Apartheid.