New Zealanders value political freedom

New Zealand often does well in international rankings and it is no surprise that we should rank first in the world with regard to 'social progress'. New Zealanders are not afraid to face up to problems and look for solutions. We are a small, highly literate country with a stable political system. We value individuality, diversity and freedom of choice. We are blessed with a beautiful country. Of course, how we choose our head of state was not included in the ranking criteria used but we believe New Zealand can improve its democracy even more by transitioning to an independent head of state. We think it is only fair that New Zealanders have a say in who holds our highest public office and there are real benefits to updating how we do things.

No one is saying New Zealand is perfect. In terms of 'Health and Wellness' we ranked 35th. In 'Affordable Housing' we ranked 21st. In 'Ecosystem and Sustainability' we ranked 32nd. There is always room for improvement and while we can pat ourselves on the back we can't become complacent.

The improvement we are advocating is a New Zealander as head of State. We are not advocating wholesale change or radical reform. We simply say that a careful step-by-step process over several years can deliver a head of State more in keeping with contemporary New Zealand. Reforming our head of state would not be hard and we have set out a clear framework for how it can be achieved. You can read our policy statement on this website. If you want to help the campaign you can donate at http://www.givealittle.co.nz/cause/kiwiheadofstate or you visit our donations page http://www.republic.org.nz/donate/. New Zealand is a capable country and we are not afraid to embrace change.

War of words ensnares Prime Minister and Governor-General

An unseemly spat has caused our Prime Minister to publicly insult former Chief Superintendent Dai Davies, former head of the Royal Protection Squad in the UK. It started when PR staff at Government House and the Department of Internal Affairs (together with PR staff at Kensington Place) decided to stage a 9 day, 'whistle-stop' tour of New Zealand by William and Kate. 

Nostalgic stories of previous royal visits have been appearing in magazines and the news media. Royal watchers are being encouraged to line the streets to see the couple. The visit is designed to promote royalty and use royal celebrity to promote New Zealand products and places. Part of the PR campaign has involved giving out detailed information on where the visitors will be and along which routes their cars will travel. The New Zealand Governor-General's twitter account has been used to send out information encouraging the public to be excited by the visit but the tweets in question are being written by members of the PR team and not by the Governor-General himself. 

In an interview with the Daily Mirror, Dai Davies described whoever decided to release such detailed information as "an idiot" claiming it compromised the couple's security. He has since insisted that the Daily Mirror article quoted him out of context and it seems clear he was not directing his insult at the Governor-General. Our Prime Minister has now entered the debate claiming "that bloke's an idiot, the Governor-General certainly isn't". Former Chief Superintendent Davies could be right about the risks but his arguments have been refuted on the grounds that security for the visit has been cleared by Kensington Palace and the New Zealand Police.

What is unseemly about all this is that the Governor-General's twitter account should not have been used to promote the tour in the way it was. Our Prime Minister should have remained above the fray. The office of Governor-General is supposed to have a level of decorum and it needs to rethink its use of social media. The Prime Minister of New Zealand should not be getting involved and calling people names in a tit-for-tat argument. The royal 'celebrity head of state' road show is getting out of hand and New Zealand deserves better.

A new flag and a new head of state are both inevitable

John Key and the Cabinet have followed the New Zealand Herald's advice and given what he described as a "very thoughtful speech" about choosing a new flag after a January 30th editorial had argued that "if there is to be a change...it must be the product of a far more professional exercise and carefully considered decision". At the time we argued for a two stage referendum process similar to the electoral change referendums and similar to our own plans for a two stage referendum on the head of state. Our proposal is for the setting up of a constitutional commission outside parliament (with cross party support inside parliament) who would develop two alternative electoral options - one using direct election and one indirect election. Those two models would be put to voters in an indicator referendum that would measure whether we wanted a democratic head of state and whether we preferred direct or indirect election. From there detailed plans would be drawn up and a final binding referendum would be held. The two stage flag referendum process now being suggested by the Prime Minister is a big boost for the campaign for a New Zealand head of state because it will encourage all New Zealanders to think about what we stand for as a nation and about those final steps to full independence. The PM can try and talk down the republic issue as much as he likes but there is no escaping the obvious conclusion that having our own head of state is a far more meaningful and important change. New Zealand will not be independent from Britain until we have a New Zealander as head of state. Both are changes that have to happen.

Royalism is no excuse for inequality

Wanganui Chronicle editor Mark Dawson thinks having an unelected British head of state in New Zealand is probably a good thing because it is "slightly bizarre" and "defies logic". This is a common argument used by royalists to justify the fact that we live in a democracy but we are not allowed to choose our head of state. Dawson is at least up front about his allegiances and even if his arguments are weak (and his poll unscientific) he is expressing some of the contradictory beliefs underlying the current system. There is a strong need by many in New Zealand to insist that British culture remain in a position of privilege. It is part of our colonial history and is at the core of all colonial thinking - the idea that one culture is better or more worthy than all others and that inequality can be ignored so long as you are personally benefiting from it. Of course there are just as many New Zealanders with British heritage who celebrate fair play and democracy and who want Kiwis to have a proper, democratic head of state. Becoming a republic is not a rejection of British values. It is a rejection of royalism and inequality.

Long term we can't expect everyone to stop being enamoured by royality. There will always be people who think its somehow glamourous or noble or exciting. The palace will always have PR teams promoting the royal family as laudable and relevant but royalists can't expect to keep getting their own way for ever. New Zealanders have a right to choose their head of state and only New Zealanders can be eligible for role. It is time for Royalists to understand that their fascination with royalty is no excuse to keep the contradictions in place. We live in a democracy and a democratic head of state who lives and works here is far better for New Zealand.