Newshub reports on the government’s review of electoral laws, donations, the voting age and term of parliament, won’t look at a republic:

The review will not look at online voting, a return to 'first past the post' or alternatives to MMP, the future of Māori electorates, local electoral law, or big constitutional changes such as New Zealand becoming a republic.

First, stating that a republic is a “big constitutional change” is simply wrong. Legal academics have looked at this issue many times and in great detail over the past three decades. The changes required are not in fact “big”, the most recent example of Barbados republic legislation demonstrates the changes needed are straightforward.

Second, we don’t need a constitutional review to make the change happen. New Zealand Republic has a clear policy and process for how we can achieve a New Zealand citizen as head of state. We’ve been through two constitutional reviews in the past twenty years that haven’t gone anywhere.

Third, this issue really isn’t a major constitutional one. It’s about symbolism, not constitutional change. We want a New Zealand citizen as head of state; we almost have that in our Governor-General. It’s not difficult to imagine that office transformed into our actual head of state, and it isn’t legally very difficult.