Do we need more MPs? The NZ Initiative thinks we do - saying today that, instead of 120, we should have 170.

It says the number of MPs in New Zealand is low compared to other countries with similar populations and we need 50 more to keep them accessible to voters.

Another thing it’s calling for is a four-year parliamentary term. That’s a no-brainer, as far as I’m concerned. But 50 more MPs? No thanks.

However, I do think some change is needed because of the size of some of our electorates.

Which is essentially why the NZ Initiative is advocating for more MPs.

But I think a much better option would be to have less list MPs and more electorate MPs.

Because, you think about the size of some electorates - the West Coast is a prime example - I’ve always thought it’s crazy that one electorate MP has to represent and cover such a huge area.

The Te Tai Tonga Maori seat is another one. One MP has to cover the whole South Island - as well as Stewart Island, the Chatham Islands, Wellington City and the Hutt Valley.

The reason the NZ Initiative is making this call today, is because it’s reviewed the last 30 years under the MMP voting system. And its two key points are the parliamentary term and the number of MPs.

Senior Fellow Nick Clark says the three-year term is too short for effective long-term policymaking. He says: "By the time a government finds its feet and starts implementing policy, it is already thinking about the next election. A four-year term would give governments time to develop coherent long-term policies."

No argument from me there.

He also says our parliament - with 120 MPs - is about 30 percent smaller than international benchmarks say it should be.

So he says get 50 more. He also thinks we need less cabinet ministers and reckons 15 would be enough.

But I reckon he’s going to be pushing it uphill to sell his idea of more politicians.

I’m not sold. Far from it.

LISTEN ABOVE