Typically, the New Zealand Parliament has 120 seats but after the 2023 election the number of MPs rose to 123. This is because of what is referred to as the “overhang” which can occur when a party wins more electorate seats than its share of the party vote entitles it to. This is one of the vagaries of our MMP electoral system.
In the current Parliament 72 MPs from six parties represent 65 electorates and seven Māori seats. The other 51 MPs are from party lists.
Voters have a say as to the person who represents them in their electorates. They do not have a say about who list MPs are, other than voting for the party list. The individuals on the list are chosen by the party and are ranked.
This means that list MPs don’t have to pass the test of their local electorate. To win an electorate seat, a candidate must be well-known, liked, competent, with useful skillsets and capabilities and have a broad understanding of the needs of the community.
A list MP needs to be liked only by the small and anonymous committee making the party appointments – representation by cabal rather than the whole electorate. How does this square with the orthodox understanding of the duties and responsibilities of an MP?
Edmund Burke, in 1774, articulated a foundational view of the duties of an MP. An MP should not act merely as a delegate who follows the instructions of constituents but as a representative who uses his own judgment and conscience in the service of the nation.
Burke’s remarks were in part a rebuke of emerging tendencies toward populist or plebiscitary democracy, warning against the idea that elected officials should be mere mouthpieces for majority will. He believed genuine leadership often requires going against immediate public opinion if popular sentiment conflicts with what is right or in the long-term national interest.
New Zealand’s system integrates Burkean “trustee” principles in limited but important contexts – particularly conscience votes where MPs are explicitly told to rely on their own judgment and moral reasoning. Yet the broader reality of party discipline and proportional representation reflects a more modern “mandate-based” model, where MPs are expected to advance the policies of their parties rather than act as autonomous decision-makers.
One unintended consequence of the MMP model is that it delivers a disproportionate over-representation of minorities and under-representation of the majority. This challenges the Burkean model in that a significant proportion of MPs may not be engaged in a broad community with in-depth knowledge of important issues.
In addition, many list MPs are “career politicians” who have come up through the ranks as party functionaries or via the office of a sitting MP. They may find themselves on a party list and in Parliament without ever stepping into the hurly-burly of normal life.
Business adviser Bruce Cotterill has suggested we could reduce the number of MPs to 90, with 60 elected representatives and 30 from party lists. He thinks a smaller percentage of list MPs “would narrow the oversized fascination with fringe issues and enable us to focus more on the big issues”.
He also suggests a minimum age as a qualification for an MP – say 35 – which would mean they would have had some real-world work experience. A term limitation would mean there would be a continual refreshment of ideas and proposals.
Perhaps the seemingly never-ending recesses could be reduced so our MPs could apply themselves more diligently to the tasks of investigation and evidence-gathering, resulting in better legislation and ultimately better service in the interests of the nation.
David Harvey is a retired district court judge.
