They explain that the Knesset was set at 120 MKs when the country was founded and had less than a million residents. Now that there are about 8 million residents, it is long overdue, as the 120 MKs are overworked with heavy workload and multiple committees and caucuses they are all members of. Other countries with similar population sizes have larger parliaments.
As well, and I learned a new word from the Times of Israel article on the matter, many other countries have bicameral parliaments, while Israel does not but the 120 have to do everything.
For those of you who might not know what bicameral, as I did not:
bi·cam·er·al ˌbīˈkamərəl/ adjective
- (of a legislative body) having two branches or chambers.
They say the additional expense to the State of tens of millions of shekels a year is justified as the MKs would work more efficiently.
According to TOI, similar bills in the past were rejected.
According to Kol Hai's report, Maklev prefers increasing the size of Knesset rather than expanding the Norwegian Law, as has also been proposed.
I don't have an opinion on the matter. I understand the need for it when considering the increase in population. I don't know if MKs are really overworked or not. They do get an awful lot of vacation - far more than the average working person in Israel. I don't know why it was rejected in the past - maybe most MKs want to keep it a somewhat exclusive club.
------------------------------------------------------
Reach thousands of readers with your ad by advertising on Life in Israel ------------------------------------------------------
