This week, we released our latest report, MMP after 30 years: Time for Electoral Reform? 
 
Amidst a long list of recommendations to improve our electoral system, one sparked a particularly strong reaction – that Parliament be increased from 120 members to 170. It dominated media mentions. 
 
To say the public does not hold MPs in high esteem is a bit like saying they are mildly suspicious of foxes guarding henhouses.  
 
Readers may be wondering what I was thinking when I suggested we need more of them. There are some good reasons. 
 
New Zealand has a very small Parliament compared to most similarly sized developed countries. Norway, Ireland, Denmark and Finland all have populations of 5 to 6 million and all have between 169 and 200 MPs in their lower houses. 
 
This is no coincidence. There is a sweet spot when balancing transaction costs with representation. The ‘cube root law’ suggests an optimal parliament size is the cube root of a country’s population. In New Zealand’s case, that would be 170. 
 
This suggests that New Zealanders are currently seriously underrepresented.  
 
Our MPs must serve large and diverse electorates, both geographically and in terms of population. The average electorate now has 70,300 people compared to 51,800 at the first MMP election. Electorate MPs can struggle with the size of their electorates and the demands of their many constituents across multiple issues. 
 
A relatively small number of MPs also has consequences for scrutiny and accountability, especially when combined with our very large and powerful ‘Executive’ (28 ministers and two undersecretaries).  
 
MPs currently must sit on multiple committees as part-timers where they are overwhelmed by large and complex bills, huge volumes of submissions, and demands to scrutinise ministers and departments. More MPs should lighten the load and allow the fostering of deeper and more specialised knowledge. 
 
More MPs are also an important element in reducing overhang seats. There is no space here to explain, so please read the report or watch our webinar. 
 
The cost of Parliament would increase, but it could be offset by reducing and streamlining the Executive and rationalising the 81 portfolios and 43 often bloated departments. The quality of ministers could be improved if there were a bigger pool of MPs to choose from. 
 
The size of Parliament is one of many issues my report canvasses. It makes other important recommendations, including a four-year parliamentary term and tweaks to MMP to improve proportionality.  

Overall, the report seeks to improve fairness and efficiency. Having more MPs I believe is an important element.  

To learn more about Nick's research, read the full report, watch the webinar and listen to our podcast.