October 17, 2024 • 19 mins
Should or shouldn’t New Zealand become a republic?
It’s a quandary that’s sparked fierce debate over decades, and it’s back on the agenda as King Charles heads down under for his first tour – but is skipping New Zealand.
With his visit prompting debate over in Australia, is it time for New Zealand to consider becoming a republic?
Today on The Front Page, Republic NZ’s Peter Hamilton joins us to discuss this issue and what a monarchy-free New Zealand could look like.
We did invite Monarchy NZ to participate in this discussion, but they declined.
Follow The Front Page on iHeartRadio, Apple Podcasts, Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts.
You can read more about this and other stories in the New Zealand Herald, online at nzherald.co.nz, or tune in to news bulletins across the NZME network.
Host: Chelsea Daniels
Sound Engineer: Paddy Fox
Producer: Ethan Sills
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:05):
Hei Elder. I'm Chelsea Daniels and this is the Front Page,
a daily podcast presented by the New Zealand Herald. Should
or shouldn't New Zealand become a republic? It's a quandary
that sparked fierce debate over decades, and it's back on
(00:27):
the agenda as King Charles heads down Under for his
first tour, but is skipping New Zealand with his visit,
prompting debate over in Australia is a time for New
Zealand to consider becoming a republic? Today on the Front Page,
Republican Z's Peter Hamilton joins us to discuss this issue
(00:48):
and what a monarchy free New Zealand could look like.
We did invite Monarchy and Z to participate in this discussion,
but they declined. So, Peter, can you tell me how
long have you been a staunch Republican?
Speaker 2 (01:05):
Well, I guess it would be about twenty or thirty years.
But I was, until my retirement ten years ago, a
member of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade in Wellington,
therefore representing New Zealand overseas. So at that point I
had to keep my views, my personal views to myself
on the question of New Zealand's head of state. But
(01:27):
since I've been retired, of course, I don't have that
constraint anymore. So I'm now free to say what I
really think about the issues and also draw on my
professional experience as a New Zealand diplomat over the years
as to why I think we should now have our
New Zealand head of state?
Speaker 1 (01:44):
Well, why should we?
Speaker 2 (01:45):
Well, it's an issue that can be debated from both sides. Firstly,
I think that it's time for New Zealand to finish what,
in essence is an uncompleted constitutional puzzle since we became
a name from eighteen forty onwards. The head of state
in any country, including New Zealand, has a very important
(02:08):
role to play. In our case, it's a ceremonial role.
It's not executive as it is in the United States,
for example. It's a ceremonial role, but it personifies the
country itself, and so the head of state has to
be a person in my view, who lives among us
and is able to rise above domestic politics and can
(02:30):
champion the interests of the nation, not only internally in
New Zealand, but also externally. Overseas. Now we have a
New Zealand. Of course the Governor's General all have been
fine people, but they're hampered in their international role because,
of course other countries know that our head of state
is not actually a New Zealander but somebody living offshore
(02:52):
a long way away in London, and this is a
very confusing concept to most countries around the world. It
does impede our international image, which is why I think
we should bring home the role of head of state
to where it actually really does now belong, and that
is in the form of the Governor General by transforming
the Governor General's office into that of our head of
(03:15):
state as a New Zealander.
Speaker 1 (03:17):
And like you said, the Governor General at the moment
is very ceremonial. You'd want them to do a little
bit more, say take some jobs off of the Foreign
Minister's hands.
Speaker 2 (03:26):
I suppose no, actually, no, this is a very important point.
I think it's very important that we make the distinction
between the head of state, who is a ceremonial role,
and the head of government who is the prime minister
in the cabinet. And I don't believe we should merge
the two. I think the head of state should remain
non political and clearly non political in terms of the
(03:49):
person we appoint to the job, and should be able
to rise above the domestic politics at any time. So
this is a concern I think that New Zealanders have
about how we would appoint our head of state. I
think it's essential that we keep the role as ceremonial
nothing to do with running the country. In terms of
executive roles. That remains with the government of the day,
(04:13):
the Prime Minister and Cabinet of the day and Parliament,
so it's quite quite separate.
Speaker 1 (04:18):
Are there any other countries that we could look to
and their set up? I suppose any of those that
you'd quite like the look of.
Speaker 2 (04:23):
Well, I think one that we would want to avoid
is the United States model. And a lot of people
do get very worried about our head of state, who
might become a sort of Trump person. Now, in the
manner we appoint our head of state, we would need
to avoid any possibility of somebody like a Trump taking
the role of head of state. Other countries some combine
(04:46):
the role of government and ceremonial. In the United States,
does that other countries keep it separate. For example, in Germany,
the President of Germany is not a member of the government.
They are commonial as a Singapore. Now, some countries elect
their head of state. Ireland does very successfully and as
(05:08):
Singapore very successfully elects the head of state. But we're
arguing in fact that we shouldn't have another election in
New Zealand. New Zealanders are, i think, get tired of
regular elections and the main election is for the key role,
which is that of government of the day. And we
argue that the head of state in New Zealand, when
(05:29):
we bring the office back to the Governor General, should
be chosen by a super majority of Parliament to make
that person quite deliberately and definitely a political In other words,
no politician would be eligible to take on the role
of head of state, unless of course they could garner
super majority support from Parliament. One example we've had in
(05:52):
our past was when Robert Muldoon appointed Sir Keith Holyoke
as Governor General. Holioch had been a Prime minister, stepped
down and became a minister in Maldoone's cabinet, and to
reward him, Maldoon appointed him Governor General. Now he served
quite well in that role, but it's intensely political and
therefore demeaned the office of Governor General at the time.
(06:15):
So we argue that the head of State in New
Zealand should be chosen by Parliament and should remain a
non executive ceremonial role as the Governor General currently does.
The fact is we already have a head of state
in Embryo and the Governor General currently Dame Cindi Keiro,
does all the work of any normal head of state
(06:37):
except for the international dimension, but she doesn't get the
respect and the manna that should be accorded her as
head of state because of course Governor General means she
is in the B team. She is the King's deputy
in New Zealand and therefore doesn't have the manna that
would go with being our actual head of state.
Speaker 1 (06:57):
So of course King Charles and Queen Camilla are heading
to our part of the world, going to Australia first
with events in Sydney and Canberra, then going to Samoa.
Speaker 3 (07:08):
The leg of the tour that has been shelved will
be New Zealand, and I think that's it comes a
bit of a sadness for the King Queen not to get.
Speaker 2 (07:16):
To see the Kei Weeds.
Speaker 4 (07:18):
Contrast the King's first visit to Australia as head of
State to the late Queen's first visit to Australia in
nineteen fifty four. She visited every single state and territory,
seven capital cities, seventy towns over fifty eight days. King
Charles is going to be there less than the week
and is only going to be visiting Canberra and Sydney.
(07:38):
But of course the Queen was in her twenties when
she went, and King Charles Purley in his seventies and
he's got cancer. It's studn see why.
Speaker 1 (07:49):
While we're aware he has been unwell, does it surprise
you that he and Camilla won't stop in New Zealand.
Speaker 2 (07:55):
Yes, it does because since his coronation he's known very well.
But at some point he has to turn up in
an important relationship like New Zealand as our head of state.
Now he is unwell, we know that, and he probably
is avoiding coming here on the recommendation of his doctors.
But it underscores the problem yet again that our head
of state is absent and not among us. Although Charles
(08:20):
and Camilla have paid occasional visits here, when he was
Crown Prince. Our head of state actually hasn't visited us
in that role since two thousand and two, which was
the last time Queen Elizabeth came in two thousand and two.
It's quite an anomaly for any country to have a
head of state who doesn't actually turn up in person
(08:41):
for over twenty two years, so it shows in fact,
the role now is very much different from the days
of Queen Victoria, where she could set in her widow
weeds and windsor castle and not worry too much about
the colonies in those days. Today we expect the head
of state to be active and involved in the country,
and Charles is unfortunately not able to do that. The issue,
(09:05):
of course, is that we don't think much about what
it requires of Charles to be our head of state.
The suggestion that he has time to spend on looking
after it's nearly fourteen thirteen fourteen other countries of which
he is head of state, and that being head of
state in the UK is not a full time job
(09:26):
is of course an anomaly. It's a huge job that
Charles has to undertake in the UK itself, and I
suspect that the subtext of him not coming to New
Zealand is a subtle hint that it's time that we
looked at taking some of the burden off the British monarchy.
And now quite recently, in the context of his trip
to Australia, he did say that it is for any
(09:49):
country like New Zealand, Australia or Canada to decide its
own form of representation, and if New Zealand or Australia
wished to become a republic, then of course he would
in no way stand in our way. That's quite right
and proper for him to say that, but it's also
i think a subtext as I say that he and
(10:09):
the British establishment would quite like New Zealand to get
on with the job and appoint our Governor General as
our head of state. Now some people have suggested, well,
we want to retain the monarchy because we like the
king or we like the pageantry. The point is that
we're not getting rid of our relationship with Britain. We're
not getting rid of our relationship with the King because
(10:32):
he remains Head of the Commonwealth and still is welcome
as a visitor here as head of the Commonwealth, except
that when he does come to New Zealand. He is
received by New Zealand's own head of State, who is
our Governor General transitioned into the role of head of state.
Speaker 1 (10:58):
You mentioned as well, which I thought that was quite interesting.
Also the fact that King Charles has said that he
won't stand in the way of Australia becoming a republic
ahead of his visit there. Also monarchists in Australia have
accused the state premiers of insulting King Charles as they
will not be present at a reception welcoming him to
(11:18):
the country. But I guess that's a sign of the times.
The fact that all six state premiers New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland,
Western Australia, South Australia, Tasmania, they've all said that they're
unable to attend. Now look back thirty years ago, for example,
or even a couple of decades ago, that would have
been unheard of. Don't you think.
Speaker 2 (11:38):
Absolutely unheard of when you think about the huge crowds
that welcomed Queen Elizabeth in nineteen fifty four, and even
me as a youngster stood in Tarrona Domain in nineteen
sixty three to welcome her waiver at her as she
went past the fact that the state premiers in Australia
have diplomatically said they have other things to do as
(11:59):
a massive vote of no confidence in the notion of
having a foreign head of state in Australia. Now, whatever
you might think of Charles and the royal family and
some of the individuals there, Charles is head of the Commonwealth,
so of course he's coming to sar More. But this
is for Australia to decide, and I think as far
(12:20):
as New Zealand's concerned, there's no great appetite at the
moment for discussing constitutional issues because we have a lot
of other things on. So this issue will I think,
burn along for a while yet. But nevertheless, when Australia
becomes the republic, as it eventually will, I think at
that point it does become anominally for New Zealand to
(12:41):
still be a monarchy. So I think we will probably
take our lead from Australia, even though we don't often
like to admit that we follow Australia.
Speaker 1 (12:52):
What we're saying to Australians is that it's time to
farewell the role of monarchy in Australia. The next time
may come, we'd love to welcome as visitors, absolutely welcomed
by an Australian head of state.
Speaker 3 (13:04):
The nineteen seventy five sacking of Prime Minister Gough Whitlam
by Governor General Sir John Kerr remains one of the
country's most polarizing political events, representing an unmatched level of
intervention by the Commonwealth. Australians voted against becoming purely a
republic in a referendum in nineteen ninety nine, but there
have been repeated calls for another ballot.
Speaker 1 (13:29):
What about the relationship between Maori and the crown. How
would that change? Do you think if there was no
longer a crown, Well.
Speaker 2 (13:37):
There still would be a crown, of course, and the
Crown would be the King in England and he would
be head of the Commonwealth. I know that some people
say that the Treaty of Waitangi in eighteen forty was
signed by Queen Victoria. Well, actually it was negotiated by
her officials, and I doubt that Queen Victoria herself really
had much inkling as to what was involved in that
(13:58):
far off, far flung dominion of for a colony of
New Zealand. Now the British monarchy long ago has given
up any responsibility for the implementation of the Treaty of Waiteitungi,
and since eighteen forty it's been the responsibility of a
New Zealand government and the people of New Zealand to
(14:19):
address the issues that arise from the Treaty of Waiteitungi.
So my argument is that although the Treaty is extremely
important in this the actual movement of the head of
State role from London to Wellington doesn't impact or impinge
directly on the question of the Treaty of White Tungy,
because that remains as it is now and is not
(14:41):
in any way altered or changed by having our own
head of State anything to do with the Treaty and
its role in New Zealand. As you've seen through the
Actor Treaty principles debate and the reaction from Mari people.
That's entirely a domestic New Zealand matter, and King Charles
is absolutely no role in it, and I suspect even
(15:02):
less an interest in it. So it's not an impediment
as such for the head of State role to return
to New Zealand or come back to New Zealand from
the UK. So Certainly people can create a mischievous argument
in saying that Mary will never allow us to become
a republic because they have an un dying love for
the British monarchy. I doubt that that is true in
(15:24):
my own conversations with Mari people. I think Mary people
have moved way beyond that. The point too, is that
the King Etanga is in no way impacted by having
a New Zealand head of state. In fact, it might
be the case that the New Zealand head of State
is able to accord much more priority and consideration to
(15:44):
the King e Tonga than King Charles can through his
very fleeting and occasional visits to New Zealand. There's one
important issue too, I think about having a head of state.
That is the fact that the Governor General at the
moment is hampered in her international role because she is
recognized as being the B team of our constitution and
not the A team, so that when she goes overseas,
(16:07):
there's no way the Governor General of New Zealand is
going to be accorded the same status as the Emperor
of Japan, or the Monarch in Holland, or any of
the Nordic monarchies, so the Governor General does stand at
a disadvantage because they don't have the correct designation as
head of state. The other point too, the government in
(16:28):
New Zealand, the executive in New Zealand is quite happy
to have a Governor General sitting in Government House in
Wellington that's basically on speed dial for when they need
her to come to Executive Council meetings and are quite
happy for her to undertake the investitures and ceremonial activities
that go with the Governor General's role. But to be honest,
(16:49):
the Parliament and Government of New Zealand do not accord
the Governor General. I believe the status and manner that
she should be given as head of state until she
actually becomes formally our head of state. I think it's
very easy for the New Zealand government to basically undervalue
the role of the Governor General in our society.
Speaker 1 (17:11):
Jasindra durn and Chris Hopkins have both said they think
New Zealand will become a republic in their lifetime. Do
you think that's true? Is the writing on the wall?
Speaker 2 (17:20):
Yes? I can't see that New Zealand will continue with
this arrangement. Indefinitely because it's so obviously an anomaly in
the twenty first century. I hope that by twenty forty,
the bi centenary of the Treaty of Waitangi, we do
have a New Zealand head of state who can receive
the British monarch as an equal at that stage. Now,
(17:41):
New Zealand politicians various colors and political leanings have said
they believe we should become a republic people like Jim Bolger,
Helen Clark, even Jacinda Down initially when she went into
office was a convinced Republican. But of course reality of
office makes it difficult for them to move on this
and so it gets left aside. It all becomes too
(18:03):
hard under the pressure of day to day government and
political intrigue in New Zealand, so well meaning people who
actually do support the idea of having a New Zealander
as a head of state to find it very hard
in the reality of day to day politics to progress
the idea. But yes, I think it does become obvious
over time that New Zealand needs to have a New
(18:26):
Zealander in the role. Now. I've always found it rather
odd that we expect the governor General to undertake this
role of being the King's deputy or prevoucy the Queen's
deputy in New Zealand. They did with such distinction. All
our previous Governors General I think would have made excellent
heads of state in their own right, but of course
(18:47):
they never get the chance to do that because they
are only the B team. If you remember the anomaly
situation during COVID when Cindy Kira was appointed Governor General,
she actually had to do that video hookup with the
Queen in England and so she got her mandate to
be Governor General of New Zealand from the Queen sitting
in the UK, not actually able to meet her in person.
(19:10):
It's an anomaly really to think that somehow the Governor
General of New Zealand can have this power bestowed on
her to be a governor journal by the British monarch
sitting thousands of miles away.
Speaker 1 (19:22):
Thanks for joining us, Peter. That's it for this episode
of the Front Page. You can read more about today's
stories and extensive news coverage at NZ Herald dot co
dot z. The Front Page is produced by Ethan Sills
with sound engineer Patty Fox. I'm Chelsea Daniels. Subscribe to
(19:45):
the front page on iHeartRadio or wherever you get your podcasts,
and tune in tomorrow for another look behind the headlines.
Hei Elder. I'm Chelsea Daniels and this is the Front Page,
a daily podcast presented by the New Zealand Herald. Should
or shouldn't New Zealand become a republic? It's a quandary
that sparked fierce debate over decades, and it's back on
(00:27):
the agenda as King Charles heads down Under for his
first tour, but is skipping New Zealand with his visit,
prompting debate over in Australia is a time for New
Zealand to consider becoming a republic? Today on the Front Page,
Republican Z's Peter Hamilton joins us to discuss this issue
(00:48):
and what a monarchy free New Zealand could look like.
We did invite Monarchy and Z to participate in this discussion,
but they declined. So, Peter, can you tell me how
long have you been a staunch Republican?
Speaker 2 (01:05):
Well, I guess it would be about twenty or thirty years.
But I was, until my retirement ten years ago, a
member of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade in Wellington,
therefore representing New Zealand overseas. So at that point I
had to keep my views, my personal views to myself
on the question of New Zealand's head of state. But
(01:27):
since I've been retired, of course, I don't have that
constraint anymore. So I'm now free to say what I
really think about the issues and also draw on my
professional experience as a New Zealand diplomat over the years
as to why I think we should now have our
New Zealand head of state?
Speaker 1 (01:44):
Well, why should we?
Speaker 2 (01:45):
Well, it's an issue that can be debated from both sides. Firstly,
I think that it's time for New Zealand to finish what,
in essence is an uncompleted constitutional puzzle since we became
a name from eighteen forty onwards. The head of state
in any country, including New Zealand, has a very important
(02:08):
role to play. In our case, it's a ceremonial role.
It's not executive as it is in the United States,
for example. It's a ceremonial role, but it personifies the
country itself, and so the head of state has to
be a person in my view, who lives among us
and is able to rise above domestic politics and can
(02:30):
champion the interests of the nation, not only internally in
New Zealand, but also externally. Overseas. Now we have a
New Zealand. Of course the Governor's General all have been
fine people, but they're hampered in their international role because,
of course other countries know that our head of state
is not actually a New Zealander but somebody living offshore
(02:52):
a long way away in London, and this is a
very confusing concept to most countries around the world. It
does impede our international image, which is why I think
we should bring home the role of head of state
to where it actually really does now belong, and that
is in the form of the Governor General by transforming
the Governor General's office into that of our head of
(03:15):
state as a New Zealander.
Speaker 1 (03:17):
And like you said, the Governor General at the moment
is very ceremonial. You'd want them to do a little
bit more, say take some jobs off of the Foreign
Minister's hands.
Speaker 2 (03:26):
I suppose no, actually, no, this is a very important point.
I think it's very important that we make the distinction
between the head of state, who is a ceremonial role,
and the head of government who is the prime minister
in the cabinet. And I don't believe we should merge
the two. I think the head of state should remain
non political and clearly non political in terms of the
(03:49):
person we appoint to the job, and should be able
to rise above the domestic politics at any time. So
this is a concern I think that New Zealanders have
about how we would appoint our head of state. I
think it's essential that we keep the role as ceremonial
nothing to do with running the country. In terms of
executive roles. That remains with the government of the day,
(04:13):
the Prime Minister and Cabinet of the day and Parliament,
so it's quite quite separate.
Speaker 1 (04:18):
Are there any other countries that we could look to
and their set up? I suppose any of those that
you'd quite like the look of.
Speaker 2 (04:23):
Well, I think one that we would want to avoid
is the United States model. And a lot of people
do get very worried about our head of state, who
might become a sort of Trump person. Now, in the
manner we appoint our head of state, we would need
to avoid any possibility of somebody like a Trump taking
the role of head of state. Other countries some combine
(04:46):
the role of government and ceremonial. In the United States,
does that other countries keep it separate. For example, in Germany,
the President of Germany is not a member of the government.
They are commonial as a Singapore. Now, some countries elect
their head of state. Ireland does very successfully and as
(05:08):
Singapore very successfully elects the head of state. But we're
arguing in fact that we shouldn't have another election in
New Zealand. New Zealanders are, i think, get tired of
regular elections and the main election is for the key role,
which is that of government of the day. And we
argue that the head of state in New Zealand, when
(05:29):
we bring the office back to the Governor General, should
be chosen by a super majority of Parliament to make
that person quite deliberately and definitely a political In other words,
no politician would be eligible to take on the role
of head of state, unless of course they could garner
super majority support from Parliament. One example we've had in
(05:52):
our past was when Robert Muldoon appointed Sir Keith Holyoke
as Governor General. Holioch had been a Prime minister, stepped
down and became a minister in Maldoone's cabinet, and to
reward him, Maldoon appointed him Governor General. Now he served
quite well in that role, but it's intensely political and
therefore demeaned the office of Governor General at the time.
(06:15):
So we argue that the head of State in New
Zealand should be chosen by Parliament and should remain a
non executive ceremonial role as the Governor General currently does.
The fact is we already have a head of state
in Embryo and the Governor General currently Dame Cindi Keiro,
does all the work of any normal head of state
(06:37):
except for the international dimension, but she doesn't get the
respect and the manna that should be accorded her as
head of state because of course Governor General means she
is in the B team. She is the King's deputy
in New Zealand and therefore doesn't have the manna that
would go with being our actual head of state.
Speaker 1 (06:57):
So of course King Charles and Queen Camilla are heading
to our part of the world, going to Australia first
with events in Sydney and Canberra, then going to Samoa.
Speaker 3 (07:08):
The leg of the tour that has been shelved will
be New Zealand, and I think that's it comes a
bit of a sadness for the King Queen not to get.
Speaker 2 (07:16):
To see the Kei Weeds.
Speaker 4 (07:18):
Contrast the King's first visit to Australia as head of
State to the late Queen's first visit to Australia in
nineteen fifty four. She visited every single state and territory,
seven capital cities, seventy towns over fifty eight days. King
Charles is going to be there less than the week
and is only going to be visiting Canberra and Sydney.
(07:38):
But of course the Queen was in her twenties when
she went, and King Charles Purley in his seventies and
he's got cancer. It's studn see why.
Speaker 1 (07:49):
While we're aware he has been unwell, does it surprise
you that he and Camilla won't stop in New Zealand.
Speaker 2 (07:55):
Yes, it does because since his coronation he's known very well.
But at some point he has to turn up in
an important relationship like New Zealand as our head of state.
Now he is unwell, we know that, and he probably
is avoiding coming here on the recommendation of his doctors.
But it underscores the problem yet again that our head
of state is absent and not among us. Although Charles
(08:20):
and Camilla have paid occasional visits here, when he was
Crown Prince. Our head of state actually hasn't visited us
in that role since two thousand and two, which was
the last time Queen Elizabeth came in two thousand and two.
It's quite an anomaly for any country to have a
head of state who doesn't actually turn up in person
(08:41):
for over twenty two years, so it shows in fact,
the role now is very much different from the days
of Queen Victoria, where she could set in her widow
weeds and windsor castle and not worry too much about
the colonies in those days. Today we expect the head
of state to be active and involved in the country,
and Charles is unfortunately not able to do that. The issue,
(09:05):
of course, is that we don't think much about what
it requires of Charles to be our head of state.
The suggestion that he has time to spend on looking
after it's nearly fourteen thirteen fourteen other countries of which
he is head of state, and that being head of
state in the UK is not a full time job
(09:26):
is of course an anomaly. It's a huge job that
Charles has to undertake in the UK itself, and I
suspect that the subtext of him not coming to New
Zealand is a subtle hint that it's time that we
looked at taking some of the burden off the British monarchy.
And now quite recently, in the context of his trip
to Australia, he did say that it is for any
(09:49):
country like New Zealand, Australia or Canada to decide its
own form of representation, and if New Zealand or Australia
wished to become a republic, then of course he would
in no way stand in our way. That's quite right
and proper for him to say that, but it's also
i think a subtext as I say that he and
(10:09):
the British establishment would quite like New Zealand to get
on with the job and appoint our Governor General as
our head of state. Now some people have suggested, well,
we want to retain the monarchy because we like the
king or we like the pageantry. The point is that
we're not getting rid of our relationship with Britain. We're
not getting rid of our relationship with the King because
(10:32):
he remains Head of the Commonwealth and still is welcome
as a visitor here as head of the Commonwealth, except
that when he does come to New Zealand. He is
received by New Zealand's own head of State, who is
our Governor General transitioned into the role of head of state.
Speaker 1 (10:58):
You mentioned as well, which I thought that was quite interesting.
Also the fact that King Charles has said that he
won't stand in the way of Australia becoming a republic
ahead of his visit there. Also monarchists in Australia have
accused the state premiers of insulting King Charles as they
will not be present at a reception welcoming him to
(11:18):
the country. But I guess that's a sign of the times.
The fact that all six state premiers New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland,
Western Australia, South Australia, Tasmania, they've all said that they're
unable to attend. Now look back thirty years ago, for example,
or even a couple of decades ago, that would have
been unheard of. Don't you think.
Speaker 2 (11:38):
Absolutely unheard of when you think about the huge crowds
that welcomed Queen Elizabeth in nineteen fifty four, and even
me as a youngster stood in Tarrona Domain in nineteen
sixty three to welcome her waiver at her as she
went past the fact that the state premiers in Australia
have diplomatically said they have other things to do as
(11:59):
a massive vote of no confidence in the notion of
having a foreign head of state in Australia. Now, whatever
you might think of Charles and the royal family and
some of the individuals there, Charles is head of the Commonwealth,
so of course he's coming to sar More. But this
is for Australia to decide, and I think as far
(12:20):
as New Zealand's concerned, there's no great appetite at the
moment for discussing constitutional issues because we have a lot
of other things on. So this issue will I think,
burn along for a while yet. But nevertheless, when Australia
becomes the republic, as it eventually will, I think at
that point it does become anominally for New Zealand to
(12:41):
still be a monarchy. So I think we will probably
take our lead from Australia, even though we don't often
like to admit that we follow Australia.
Speaker 1 (12:52):
What we're saying to Australians is that it's time to
farewell the role of monarchy in Australia. The next time
may come, we'd love to welcome as visitors, absolutely welcomed
by an Australian head of state.
Speaker 3 (13:04):
The nineteen seventy five sacking of Prime Minister Gough Whitlam
by Governor General Sir John Kerr remains one of the
country's most polarizing political events, representing an unmatched level of
intervention by the Commonwealth. Australians voted against becoming purely a
republic in a referendum in nineteen ninety nine, but there
have been repeated calls for another ballot.
Speaker 1 (13:29):
What about the relationship between Maori and the crown. How
would that change? Do you think if there was no
longer a crown, Well.
Speaker 2 (13:37):
There still would be a crown, of course, and the
Crown would be the King in England and he would
be head of the Commonwealth. I know that some people
say that the Treaty of Waitangi in eighteen forty was
signed by Queen Victoria. Well, actually it was negotiated by
her officials, and I doubt that Queen Victoria herself really
had much inkling as to what was involved in that
(13:58):
far off, far flung dominion of for a colony of
New Zealand. Now the British monarchy long ago has given
up any responsibility for the implementation of the Treaty of Waiteitungi,
and since eighteen forty it's been the responsibility of a
New Zealand government and the people of New Zealand to
(14:19):
address the issues that arise from the Treaty of Waiteitungi.
So my argument is that although the Treaty is extremely
important in this the actual movement of the head of
State role from London to Wellington doesn't impact or impinge
directly on the question of the Treaty of White Tungy,
because that remains as it is now and is not
(14:41):
in any way altered or changed by having our own
head of State anything to do with the Treaty and
its role in New Zealand. As you've seen through the
Actor Treaty principles debate and the reaction from Mari people.
That's entirely a domestic New Zealand matter, and King Charles
is absolutely no role in it, and I suspect even
(15:02):
less an interest in it. So it's not an impediment
as such for the head of State role to return
to New Zealand or come back to New Zealand from
the UK. So Certainly people can create a mischievous argument
in saying that Mary will never allow us to become
a republic because they have an un dying love for
the British monarchy. I doubt that that is true in
(15:24):
my own conversations with Mari people. I think Mary people
have moved way beyond that. The point too, is that
the King Etanga is in no way impacted by having
a New Zealand head of state. In fact, it might
be the case that the New Zealand head of State
is able to accord much more priority and consideration to
(15:44):
the King e Tonga than King Charles can through his
very fleeting and occasional visits to New Zealand. There's one
important issue too, I think about having a head of state.
That is the fact that the Governor General at the
moment is hampered in her international role because she is
recognized as being the B team of our constitution and
not the A team, so that when she goes overseas,
(16:07):
there's no way the Governor General of New Zealand is
going to be accorded the same status as the Emperor
of Japan, or the Monarch in Holland, or any of
the Nordic monarchies, so the Governor General does stand at
a disadvantage because they don't have the correct designation as
head of state. The other point too, the government in
(16:28):
New Zealand, the executive in New Zealand is quite happy
to have a Governor General sitting in Government House in
Wellington that's basically on speed dial for when they need
her to come to Executive Council meetings and are quite
happy for her to undertake the investitures and ceremonial activities
that go with the Governor General's role. But to be honest,
(16:49):
the Parliament and Government of New Zealand do not accord
the Governor General. I believe the status and manner that
she should be given as head of state until she
actually becomes formally our head of state. I think it's
very easy for the New Zealand government to basically undervalue
the role of the Governor General in our society.
Speaker 1 (17:11):
Jasindra durn and Chris Hopkins have both said they think
New Zealand will become a republic in their lifetime. Do
you think that's true? Is the writing on the wall?
Speaker 2 (17:20):
Yes? I can't see that New Zealand will continue with
this arrangement. Indefinitely because it's so obviously an anomaly in
the twenty first century. I hope that by twenty forty,
the bi centenary of the Treaty of Waitangi, we do
have a New Zealand head of state who can receive
the British monarch as an equal at that stage. Now,
(17:41):
New Zealand politicians various colors and political leanings have said
they believe we should become a republic people like Jim Bolger,
Helen Clark, even Jacinda Down initially when she went into
office was a convinced Republican. But of course reality of
office makes it difficult for them to move on this
and so it gets left aside. It all becomes too
(18:03):
hard under the pressure of day to day government and
political intrigue in New Zealand, so well meaning people who
actually do support the idea of having a New Zealander
as a head of state to find it very hard
in the reality of day to day politics to progress
the idea. But yes, I think it does become obvious
over time that New Zealand needs to have a New
(18:26):
Zealander in the role. Now. I've always found it rather
odd that we expect the governor General to undertake this
role of being the King's deputy or prevoucy the Queen's
deputy in New Zealand. They did with such distinction. All
our previous Governors General I think would have made excellent
heads of state in their own right, but of course
(18:47):
they never get the chance to do that because they
are only the B team. If you remember the anomaly
situation during COVID when Cindy Kira was appointed Governor General,
she actually had to do that video hookup with the
Queen in England and so she got her mandate to
be Governor General of New Zealand from the Queen sitting
in the UK, not actually able to meet her in person.
(19:10):
It's an anomaly really to think that somehow the Governor
General of New Zealand can have this power bestowed on
her to be a governor journal by the British monarch
sitting thousands of miles away.
Speaker 1 (19:22):
Thanks for joining us, Peter. That's it for this episode
of the Front Page. You can read more about today's
stories and extensive news coverage at NZ Herald dot co
dot z. The Front Page is produced by Ethan Sills
with sound engineer Patty Fox. I'm Chelsea Daniels. Subscribe to
(19:45):
the front page on iHeartRadio or wherever you get your podcasts,
and tune in tomorrow for another look behind the headlines.
Popular Podcasts
Amy Robach & T.J. Holmes present: Aubrey O’Day, Covering the Diddy Trial
Introducing… Aubrey O’Day Diddy’s former protege, television personality, platinum selling music artist, Danity Kane alum Aubrey O’Day joins veteran journalists Amy Robach and TJ Holmes to provide a unique perspective on the trial that has captivated the attention of the nation. Join them throughout the trial as they discuss, debate, and dissect every detail, every aspect of the proceedings. Aubrey will offer her opinions and expertise, as only she is qualified to do given her first-hand knowledge. From her days on Making the Band, as she emerged as the breakout star, the truth of the situation would be the opposite of the glitz and glamour. Listen throughout every minute of the trial, for this exclusive coverage. Amy Robach and TJ Holmes present Aubrey O’Day, Covering the Diddy Trial, an iHeartRadio podcast.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy And Charlamagne Tha God!