MMP makes for changes by stealth

We don't have a constitution and have seen fundamental changes by stealth, without the consent of the people, without an over-arching, coherent conversation or consensus, reckons Mike Moore.

MMP was forced on a defeated Germany after the World War 2 with a powerful idea in mind.

To stop any one political party being so powerful it could govern on its own.

It works in wealthy Nordic countries where the minor parties are mature and based on historic principles.

These countries are normally monarchies with a strong constitution that cannot easily be changed.

Other than the Greens, the smaller political parties in New Zealand are led by individuals who were first elected under major party labels, and who would never have been noticed without the political base that their original party brands gave them.

All left their parties out of frustration, ambition or vanity.

Our electoral system is inherently unstable; people who voted for MMP wanted the politicians to have less power; many thought this new system would give them less politics.

The opposite has happened.

Now our governments are formed and agendas announced after an election.

Squalid and sordid deals reached, which always spend more money, normally to groups the smaller parties wish to reward.

Thus, it's important for the people to know before an election what this all means so they can make informed decisions.

This is an important obligation of the media but they can't seem to nail down or expose what various coalitions could mean.

Famously, Winston Peters promised never to join National, but did when promised the Finance job.

Then he gravely pledged he would not accept the baubles of office and then became Foreign Minister, but said this did not mean he was a member of the Government - this is unique in the world.

Opinion polls suggest that the Maori Party will decide who forms the next government.

This deserves scrutiny - what do they want? One Maori leader said that they wanted a partnership with a government, that it was not about numbers.

Pardon? What does this mean? Another said all they wanted was Maori control over Maori expenditures: does this mean Iwis will control Maori expenditure - what would that mean?Unrebutted was the claim by Tuhoe for a Scottish-type Parliament, which has its own education, health, courts and police, with the powers to tax.

These are not small questions: they need to be explained and Labour and National need to put their principles up before an election.

When Anglican Bishops give money to the Maori Party, saying they agree with a new Upper House based on partnership, equality, not on the principle of one person, one vote, we should ask some questions.

We don't have a constitution and have seen fundamental changes by stealth, without the consent of the people, without an over-arching, coherent conversation or consensus.

Each change seems small - abolition of the Honours system, rights to the Privy Council abolished, someone decided we are a bicultural nation not a multicultural society.

Conventions are broken, the independence of the public service threatened, we no longer have QCs, they are SCs and so on.

Deals can be struck that seem insignificant but gradually change the nature of our society and democracy.

I sensed this some years ago and prepared legislation to begin a constitutional process that would last beyond the life of any one government.

When I wrote a series of articles about this at the beginning of this year, I was swamped in a tsunami of indifference.

I had spoken to representatives of most of the parties.

They need room to negotiate and don't want to offend people they may seek to deal with.

This denies the people the opportunity to participate, or to exercise their vote, in the knowledge of what the options are.

Anything can happen and normally does.

Lets hope I'm wrong, because some of these changes, once made, are hard to unmake.

• Mike Moore is a former prime minister of New Zealand, and a former director-general of the World Trade Organisation.