Nau mai haere mai.

The interim report of the Independent Electoral Review has made some significant draft recommendations, including that the voting age be lowered 16 and the party vote threshold be lowered to 3.5%. But it’s the proposal for a referendum on extending the parliamentary term that has caught the eye of political analyst Grant Duncan today.

There are sound reasons for making such a change, Duncan explains, including giving governments more time to make policy and enact laws between the three-yearly election circuses: “To get a new law from a first cabinet paper to an act of parliament can take a couple of years – longer if there’s a lot of argument. So we’re not allowing much time for governments to really get things done.”

Trouble is, we’ve been down this road before – in 1967 and 1990 – and both times New Zealanders opted for the status quo. Perhaps they cherish a more frequent opportunity to hold politicians accountable. And perhaps the inevitably partisan and self-interested debates about a longer term simply confirm that first instinct.

Whatever the case, public submissions on the review recommendations are open until July 17, so there’s still time to have your say either way.

In the meantime, thanks to all those readers who have made a contribution to our annual fundraising drive, your support is thoroughly appreciated. We rely on reader contributions to keep delivering fact-based journalism written by experts. If you haven’t donated yet and would like to, you can give here. Until next week, mā te wā.