David Clark
On the one hand, it does seem odd that the ability to become our head of state is genetically determined, a privilege reserved for a single inbred family of German descent.
On the other hand, constitutional monarchies like New Zealand are amongst the wealthiest and healthiest democracies in the world. Why change what works? New Zealand’s head of state is largely a ceremonial role with little real power. Her representative has limited influence, and anyway there are downsides to each of the myriad of other ways we could organise the hierarchy of state.
On the question of whether New Zealand should become a republic, I find myself in the unusual position of not having a strong view either way.
For those in favour of becoming a republic, a New Zealand citizen as head of state is seen as a sign of maturity and independence. Some say New Zealand is a de facto republic already. Declaring ourselves a republic is the next step on the logical journey of a nation state that today trades little with its English parent.
If we opt for republicanism, I anticipate an elected head of state. The alternative: simply tweaking the existing system to remove references to the Queen removes the last vestigial power check of an appointment made by the Prime Minister. Such a change would cement what many regard as the worst part of the existing system, without bold claim to an upside.
One of the reasons I remain to be convinced of the urgency of change is a nagging fear of the ‘constitutional creep’. An elected head of state will want to exercise their mandate robustly and therefore I think they would claim more power.
Our current system works – despite our unicameral parliament lacking the formal checks and balances possessed by many western democracies. As a country we are quick on our feet and able to respond to opportunities both economic and geopolitical. Our flexibility is our strength. We are not obsessed with a written constitution, meaning we are less litigious as a people and instead are more focused on divining common sense.
And New Zealanders understand the power a unicameral parliament wields and its potential for abuse. A clearer separation of powers will almost certainly undermine the flexibility a unicameral parliament brings, but it could also induce public complacency toward abuses of power.
Is the desire for a higher profile head of state a sign of maturity or a signal of teenage angst? Will a head of state with more political brawn help or hinder us on the international stage? Only time will tell. I think the public of New Zealand will ultimately find republicanism irresistible.
Michael Woodhouse
I don’t have a strong view on whether New Zealand should become a republic, but if I was asked whether it will happen the answer is probably yes, but not for a long period of time. There isn’t a mood for change or a groundswell of support for dispensing with the status quo.
On the eve of a recent Royal Tour by Prince Charles and Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall, a One News/Colmar Brunton poll reported 70 percent of people wanted to keep the Queen as Head of State, while just 19 percent supported New Zealand becoming a republic. After the tour the number of people supporting a republic more than doubled, but the majority of respondents still wanted Charles as King once the Queen’s reign ends. It is also interesting to note the huge popularity of the young Royals, particularly Prince William and Princess Kate and their children George and Charlotte. The ties that bind our two nations remain strong and I’m not picking that support to change anytime soon.
The New Zealand Labour Party certainly have no moral authority to even start the republic conversation after their scurrilous behaviour during the recent flag referendum. Despite promoting a flag referendum in their manifesto at the 2014 General Election, they politicised the issue, claiming it was a vanity project by the Prime Minister. Many people supported change but didn’t like the flag design, or supported change but didn’t like John Key. This indicates possibly 75 percent support for change, yet we still have the Union Jack on our flag.
The Labour Party thought nothing of excluding the public when they dispensed with the Privy Council in 2004 and dispensed with Knighthoods in 2000. The overwhelming majority of the 85 New Zealanders awarded the equivalent honour since 2000 then elected to have their Knighthood restored when they were given the opportunity to by the present government. Only a National-led government would have the moral authority to even contemplate becoming a republic, and given the obvious lack of support that’s unlikely to happen anytime soon.
Having a New Zealander as Head of State has strong public appeal, but the role itself has little influence in our system of government.
We also need to understand the place of the Treaty of Waitangi in such a significant change. That Treaty is between Iwi representatives and the Queen as Head of State. Such a constitutional change would require a renegotiation or overhaul of the Treaty and anybody who says otherwise is, I think, frankly deluded.
In summary, while it may happen in my lifetime, it certainly isn’t going to happen anytime soon.
In summary, while it may happen in my lifetime, it certainly isn’t going to happen anytime soon. There are many more important issues the government needs to address right now like economic and social well being and that’s the priority for this government.