Mr Peters said the only way a referendum could succeed was if Opposition parties agreed with the Government on how and when a four-year term would be introduced. "That way [the public debate] will be without self-interest ... . The public needs to know everyone is considering the issue in terms of its merits not because of political bias."
Mr Shearer said a political consensus was needed to move forward on the issue. "It has to be depoliticised. It can't be seen to favour one party over another so you'd have to consider when it was going to be implemented to remove that bias."
Mr Key said yesterday while a four-year term was likely to deliver better government and reduce the negative impact on the economy that occurred during elections, it would be "a bit arrogant" for a Government to change the term "through the stroke of a pen".
Ms Turei said while the Green Party didn't have a policy stance on the issue, there were good policy reasons to go to a four-year term. "There's potential for more stability and less radical swings from one government to another and that's a major issue for the community and business in particular."
United Future leader Peter Dunne said moving to a four-year parliamentary term and a fixed election date, as also suggested by Mr Key this week, were both long-standing policies for his party.
Act leader John Banks didn't believe New Zealanders would vote for "more job security for politicians" by supporting a four-year term.
The Maori Party said it had no stance on the issue as it hadn't been discussed by its caucus.