McGee suggests they do for two reasons, one of principle the other practical. "Members in the final year of a Parliament," he wrote, "can and should be expected to contribute to its work for a full term." That implies a three-year legislative programme may be marginally harmed by changes of personnel.
More important may be the principle at stake. Candidates for Parliament offer the public their service for three years. It is an important understanding on both sides, a candidate would fiercely deny any suggestion before the ballot that he or she might not intend to serve a full term.
It was that solemn undertaking that John Key could not give at this year's election that has caused him to relinquish the role of Prime Minister. But in doing so he said he would leave Parliament before completing this term, taking advantage of the sixth month rule once the election date is set.
Labour electorate MPs Phil Goff and David Shearer have already left this Parliament when it suited them, as has National's Tim Groser and Greens Russel Norman and Kevin Hague. McGee says, "Membership of Parliament ought not to be a mere convenience for political parties, not should it be a status that can be discarded lightly."
But nor should it be a prison. If an MP has lost interest for any reason - perhaps their career is going no further or they have found Parliament too frustrating - it is surely better for the country that they give their seat to someone else rather than serve out their time, especially if the cost of a byelection can be avoided.
If the status of Parliament is suffering as McGee fears, there is no evidence of it. This year, as always, many will be fighting to get in.