Republicanism in New Zealand

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
New Zealand

This article is part of the series:
Politics and government of
New Zealand
Other countries · Politics Portal
view • talk • edit


Republicanism in New Zealand is a movement to replace the country's current status as a Commonwealth realm and constitutional monarchy with that of a Commonwealth republic. New Zealand public opinion is split between those who support the monarchy, and those who support a republic[1].

Contents

[edit] History

Traditionally, the term "republic" has been used in New Zealand to describe a sub-state independent of the central government. For example, residents of the tiny Taranaki town of Whangamomona declared their town a "republic" in 1989 to protest at the government's re-drawing of regional administrative boundaries, a protest group in Aramoana declared their town to be the Independent State of Aramoana in protest against proposals for an aluminium smelter in that town.

[edit] 19th century

The first use of the term "republic" to connate an independent state in New Zealand came in 1840 when Lieutenant Governor William Hobson described the New Zealand Company settlement of Port Nicholson (Wellington), which had its own governing council, as such [2]. Later, Wellington became the centre of agitation by settlers for representative government (which was finally granted by the New Zealand Constitution Act 1852). In particular Samuel Revans, who founded the Wellington Settlers' Constitutional Association in 1848, advocated a New Zealand republic.

In 1845 Ngapuhi chief Hone Heke, allegedly inspired by the United States of America, cut down the flagpole flying the Union Jack at Kororareka in the Bay of Islands. Heke was disgruntled at what he saw as the British Crown's failure to honor the Treaty of Waitangi, and he repeated this symbolic act of defiance three times, despite the armed resistance of British troops.

In 1867 the Māori prophet Te Whiti founded the passive resistance village of Parihaka [3], which has been variously described as a "republic" [4].

In 1879, Te Whiti and his followers launched a campaign of ploughing up European farms. Alarmed at the campaign against European settlement in Taranaki, and the lack of government response to this campaign, the people of Hawera declared themselves to be the Republic of Hawera [5], and formed their own volunteer units to oppose Te Whiti. The republic was superseded in 1881 when government troops invaded Parihaka and arrested Te Whiti.

[edit] 20th century

It was not until the 1960s that republicanism resurfaced. Left-wing activist Bruce Jesson founded the anti-royal Republican Association in 1966, later moving to Auckland and forming a political party (the original Republican Party) to push the republic issue in 1967. The party had a stridently nationalist platform [6], included in its Manifesto of the New Zealand Republic the desire to legalise all forms of drugs. Activity in the Republican Party soon petered out, and Jesson wound up the party in 1974. He continued to publish a pro-republic broadsheet entitled The Republican, although the topics covered related to general left-wing issues rather than republicanism per se. In 1979 the Mana Māori Motuhake Party included republicanism as part of its policy platform. However, the issue was never raised as Mana Māori Motuhake became a member of the Alliance Party.

[edit] Bolger initiates debate

Despite the republic issue rising to prominence in neighbouring Australia in 1992, the republic debate was not initiated in New Zealand until 1994. National Prime Minister Jim Bolger caused surprise by suggesting in his opening speech to the 44th Parliament in the Address In Reply debate that New Zealand become a republic. Bolger claimed that New Zealand's traditional links with Britain were in decline, and that the country should acknowledge that "the tide of history is moving in one direction". Trevor Mallard interjected that "the Prime Minister has been reading Paul Keating's speeches", to which Bolger retorted: "I do not read Labor Party speeches" (Paul Keating was the pro-republican Prime Minister of Australia at the time).

The Republican Coalition of New Zealand was formed to promote the move to a republic as a response to the Prime Minister. The following year, the now defunct Republican Party was established with the aim of creating a republic, along with the Monarchist League of New Zealand which was established to defend the constitutional monarchy.

However, public opinion did not respond to Bolger's call for a republic and most of Bolger's political opponents labelled the issue a distraction. Bolger's call came before the move to the MMP electoral system in 1996 which created a certain trepidation for further reform that was not present in Australia at that time.

Another factor is that whereas Australia has large populations of Irish Catholic and Mediterranean European descent, most Pākehā (New Zealanders of European origin) are of British descent. However, Jim Bolger was the son of Irish immigrants, and as in Australia, people of British origin are not united on the issue, with many regarding the monarchy as an irrelevance or an anachronism. Bolger since has denied that his views relate to his Irish heritage. His government ended the awarding of British honours in New Zealand, introducing a New Zealand Honours System. However, Bolger's successor, Jenny Shipley, did not share his enthusiasm for republicanism. Shipley noted during a visit in 1999 of the Princess Royal, "I am an unashamed royal supporter, along with many New Zealanders."

[edit] 1999 Australian referendum

In 1999, under the presidency of Dave Guerin, the Republican Coalition of New Zealand relaunched itself as the Republican Movement, similar to the Australian Republican Movement to take advantage of increased coverage the issue was getting as a result of the Australian republic referendum, although it received relatively little media coverage in New Zealand. However, during the campaign Richard Nottage, the outgoing Secretary of Foreign Affairs and Trade, took the unusual step of calling for New Zealand to consider becoming a republic.

See also: 1999 Australian republic referendum

[edit] The debate

[edit] Arguments for change

“ The New Zealand monarchy... is broken. It is broken in this important sense: that it is one of a raft of wrong symbols ”

— Colin James, Political analyst

Supporters of a republic generally divide their case for a republic between constitutional and symbolic reasons:

Symbolic arguments include:

  • New Zealand should have a New Zealander as its Head of state;
  • New Zealand should have a "resident for President";
  • New Zealand needs to assert its independence, nationhood and maturity to the world;
  • New Zealand's constitution - and indeed the attitudes of New Zealanders - are republican in their outlook [7].

Constitutional arguments include:

  • New Zealand already maintains a de facto head of state, the Governor General - who is a New Zealander and does everything the head of state should do;
  • The role and powers of the head of state should be clarified;
  • Because the Governor-General and Sovereign have little real power, they are not an effective check on the Parliamentary executive (the Prime Minister and Cabinet), an elected or appointed head of state would be a more effective check on the the executive;
  • The Prime Minister should not have the power to dismiss the Governor-General at will[8];

Many republicans believe that the notions of hereditary, primogeniture, sexual discrimination and religious discrimination inherent in the succession of the throne have no place in New Zealand's democratic and egalitarian society. They also emphasise that government devolves from the consent of the governed, not from an abstract concept such as "the Crown".

[edit] Arguments against change

“ The Monarchy is just as much a part of our national tradition as it is in Britain...[it] provides a symbol, a figurehead, with which New Zealanders can identify...every nation needs to have something which all its citizens can look to as representing their fundamental beliefs and values...the world has seen a tremendous change... but Her Majesty remains as a symbol of stability and continuity - a symbol of those values which are worth preserving ”

— Sir Keith Holyoake, Former Governor-General of New Zealand

Supporters of the monarchy in New Zealand say:

  • The current system works well; there is no need to change it. Constitutional monarchy is tried and proven system of government, some of the most politically stable nations in the world are constitutional monarchies; whereas some of the most unstable and repressive regimes have been republics. In the words of former Governor-General Sir Michael Hardie Boys "If it ain't broke, don't fix it"[9].
  • New Zealand is an independent, sovereign nation;
  • The monarch is Queen of New Zealand, not Queen of the United Kingdom;
  • The monarch is "above politics" and is a symbol of national unity rather than division;
  • The monarch costs New Zealand virtually nothing; there is only the cost of maintaining the Governor-General;
  • The monarch has little real practical political powers and is a protector of and not a threat to democracy;
  • The monarch protects the people of New Zealand from the excesses of Parliament and the Cabinet;
  • The monarch has served New Zealand well: providing leadership "above" politics, with great integrity and dedication to duty; and as a personal living symbol;

Some supporters of the monarchy defend hereditary selection of the Sovereign arguing that it is the most "natural" way to choose a non-partisan leader.

See also: Independence of New Zealand

[edit] Constitutional Issues

Were New Zealand to move towards becoming a republic, the change would occur with far more ease than in Australia. This is because New Zealand is a unitary state and has no written constitution, unlike Australia, where constitutional change must not only be approved in a referendum by a majority of voters, but also by a majority of states. New Zealand has made radical constitutional changes without difficulty in the past, such as the abolition of its upper house of parliament in 1951, the introduction of proportional representation in 1996 and most recently the creation of the Supreme Court of New Zealand as the court of final appeal.

See also: Constitution of New Zealand

[edit] The Treaty of Waitangi

“ In strict legal terms, if New Zealand became a republic tomorrow it would make no difference to the Treaty of Waitangi. Speaking as a lawyer, it's a long-established principle that successive governments take on responsibility for previous agreements ”

— Monarchist League Chairman Professor Noel Cox, [10]

Many Māori see the Crown as a guarantor of their legal rights under the Treaty of Waitangi, which was an agreement signed between the Māori tribes and the British Crown, not with the New Zealand Government. Monarchists have thus frequently argued abolishing the monarchy would "complicate" Māori relations. In response, republicans have argued that the partner to the Treaty has changed before (from the monarch of the United Kingdom to the Queen of New Zealand), and thus the move to a republic would not change the status of the Treaty of Waitangi. This view is shared by many Māori, including constitutional lawyer Moana Jackson.

See also: Treaty of Waitangi

[edit] Models of a republic

There is no agreed model of how a New Zealand republic might be constituted. Under the Head of state (Referenda) Bill, a member's Bill sponsored by Green Party MP Keith Locke, two models of a republic (along with the status quo) would be put to a referendum:

Wikisource has original text related to this article:

Both models would make New Zealand a parliamentary republic, such as Germany, Ireland, Iceland or Malta, rather than a Presidential republic such as the United States or France. Thus, the constitutional changes required would not be radical.

Other proposals have been mooted from time to time - such as appointment by a council consisting of members of the New Zealand Order of Merit.

[edit] Realm of New Zealand

Main article: Realm of New Zealand

Currently, New Zealand consists of New Zealand proper and two states in free association, Niue and the Cook Islands. Should New Zealand become a republic, the Realm of New Zealand would continue to exist without New Zealand, the Ross Dependency and Tokelau[11]. This would not be a legal hurdle to a New Zealand republic as such, and both the Cook Islands and Niue would retain their status as associated states with New Zealand, as New Zealand shares its Head of state with the Cook Islands and Niue in the same way the United Kingdom shares its Head of state with the other Commonwealth Realms. However, a New Zealand republic would present the issue of independence to the Cook Islands and Niue.

[edit] Commonwealth membership

“ A New Zealand where we journey together towards maturity as a nation, and to the Commonwealth republic I personally believe we will become before the Treaty turns 200 ”

—David Cunliffe [12].

Though becoming a republic does not automatically require a change to Commonwealth membership, Commonwealth Realms that become republics must still obtain the permission of other members to remain in the organisation after becoming a republic. Though this is usually only a formality, any member(s) against the proposal can block the membership of a republican New Zealand in the Commonwealth. However, the rejection of membership is often due to racial policies (as with Apartheid South Africa in 1961, who did not re-apply for membership) pursued by the government, not republicanism. Fiji and the Maldives did not apply for continued membership after becoming republics, and thus lost their positions in the Commonwealth.

Further information: Commonwealth of Nations: Other termination

[edit] Recent developments

The election of the present Labour-led government in 1999 under Helen Clark has seen a number of alleged moves to a republic, such as the abolition of appeals to the Privy Council.

[edit] New Zealand Honours

The New Zealand Honours System previously awarded Knighthoods and Damehoods, but these were removed in 2000. A poll conducted by the National Business Review[13] in February 2000 revealed that 54% of New Zealanders thought the titles should be scrapped. Technically, New Zealanders could still receive a Knighthood and Damehood directly from the Queen.

[edit] Supreme Court

In 1996, the Bolger government proposed to end the status of the Privy Council as the country's highest court of appeal. This policy was the same as that of the previous Labour government. Upon the re-election of the current Labour government in 2002, as part of that party's manifesto, the government introduced legislation to abolish appeals to the Privy Council. In 2003 the law was passed, despite calls from New Zealand First, National and ACT for a referendum to be called on the issue. Appeals to the Privy Council were replaced by appeals to the new Supreme Court of New Zealand from 1 July 2004. There is no link between abolition of appeals to the Privy Council and the possibility of New Zealand becoming a republic. However, some advocates of abolition were motivated by republican sentiment.

[edit] Constitutional Inquiry

In November 2004, Prime Minister Clark announced the formation of a parliamentary committee of inquiry into the constitution, chaired by United Future leader Peter Dunne. Both the National Party and New Zealand First refused to participate, however, calling the committee a "political stunt", accusing the Prime Minister of using the inquiry as a distraction from the subject of the "grievance industry" of Māori land claims under the Treaty of Waitangi[14]. Dunne has said that he supports New Zealand becoming a republic[15]. In its final report, the committee recommended wider education on the constitution. [16]

[edit] Replacement of Queen's Counsel

“ [The renaming has] been done as part of the move by certain members of the Government to remove references to the monarchy, without having a popular mandate to do so. ”

—The Monarchist League of New Zealand, [17]

In March 2006 Parliament passed the Lawyers and Conveyancers Bill which, among other things, replaced the title of Queen's Counsel, given to senior barristers, with that of Senior Counsel. These changes have already occurred in some Australian states, where they have been criticised by supporters of the status quo as "republicanism by stealth".

In response the Republican Movement noted [18] that the change is simply to acknowledge the independence of such lawyers, who are often called upon to investigate matters for the government.

[edit] Modernisation of Oaths

In May 2004 the Minister of Justice, Phil Goff, announced a review of New Zealand's Oaths and affirmations. The review suggested that New Zealand could follow the experience of Australia by removing references to the Queen from the Oaths. The Monarchist League called the change 'republicanism by stealth'. In response, the Republican Movement argued that removing references to the Queen was not 'republicanism by stealth' but simply reflected New Zealanders' contemporary values [19]. One year after the review was announced, Phil Goff released the new forms the Oaths were to take, with references to the Queen being retained, and the Oaths Modernisation Bill was introduced into Parliament.

After passing its first reading and going to the Government Administration Committee, the Bill is currently waiting to be voted on for its second reading.

See also: Oath of Allegiance (New Zealand)

[edit] Support for a republic

[edit] Opinion polls

“ Most people much prefer to have a Queen as head of state rather than a broken-down old prime minister. I would certainly like to see a continuation of the monarchy. The present situation is a very satisfactory one and I certainly support it. ”

— Sir Edmund Hillary, [20]

Most polls on the republic issue show that the New Zealand public supports by a majority the status quo. There is, however, a trend of increasing support for a republic. Generally, more younger New Zealanders tend to support a republic over the monarchy, whereas the reverse is true for older New Zealanders. Ethnically, more Māori support a republic than Pākehā[21], despite concerns over the Treaty of Waitangi. These polls may be misleading, however, as there has been little debate on the issue to date.

[edit] Current party political positions

None of the major political parties currently in Parliament have a policy of creating a republic.

[edit] Labour

“ "I think it's inevitable that New Zealand will become a republic and that would reflect the reality that New Zealand is a totally sovereign-independent 21st century nation 12,000 miles from the United Kingdom" ”

— Prime Minister Helen Clark, [22]

Support for a republic is fairly strong within the governing Labour Party. Prime Minister Helen Clark has previously expressed her support for a republic, stating that she thinks a republic is "inevitable" and describing the role of the monarchy as "antiquated". Critics of Clark's government have often derided her support for a republic, claiming that the Prime Minister desires to be "President Helen"[23] should New Zealand become a republic. Other ministers, such as David Cunliffe[24], have expressed their support for a republic. Deputy Prime Minister Michael Cullen, however, has declared that he supports the monarchy. In 2004, Cullen said he was "a sort of token monarchist in the Cabinet these days"[25].

“ Helen Clark is anti-monarchist; she is a republican. She cannot get her way, so she does it by stealth... ”

—Winston Peters, [26].

[edit] National

The National Party's constitution specifies that the Party desires "Loyalty to our country, its democratic principles and our Sovereign as Head of State". However, a vote to remove reference to the Sovereign was held in April 2003 as part of the party's constitutional conference. It was not however motivated by republicanism, but rather as part of a reduction of the core principles of the party. It was defeated by only three votes, with over 200 members of the party voting. National MPs Richard Worth and Wayne Mapp have been some of the most vocal members of their party to defend the monarchy.

[edit] Minor parties

“ Royalty runs against the grain for many New Zealanders. The Kiwi way is to treat everyone the same. It’s not in our nature to glorify someone just because they have the right Mum or Dad. ”

— Green MP Keith Locke, [27]

Similarly, the socially conservative New Zealand First party and the ACT party generally oppose moves toward a republic, whereas support for a republic appears to be strongest amongst the supporters of the Green Party, though it is not the party's policy. For some years Green MP Keith Locke has had a Private Member's Bill, the Head of state (Referenda) Bill, waiting to be drawn from ballot on the issue.

Peter Dunne, leader of the United Future Party is a supporter of New Zealand becoming a republic. Dunne argued that "We don’t lose the Commonwealth link, we don’t lose our collective history ... I think we have a president now in all but name. We’ve had our own head of state, our own Governor-General since the days of Sir Arthur Porritt... if we’ve effectively got our own head of state, why not just take the next honest step of describing them accordingly?"

[edit] Parties outside of Parliament

Outside of Parliament, a republic was opposed by the former Christian Heritage New Zealand party, which stated in its policy information that it would "[r]etain New Zealand’s position as a constitutional monarchy and oppose any moves to make New Zealand a republic". [28] The small Libertarianz Party produced a written constitution seeking a "Republic of New Freeland" to replace the constitutional monarchy.

In April 2005 The Republic of New Zealand Party was founded by Kerry Bevin with the specific aim of creating a New Zealand Republic. The previous Republican Party of New Zealand had been dissolved in 2000 after having failed to obtain any seats in Parliament.

[edit] Governors-General

Former Governor-General Dame Catherine Tizard said publicly in 2004 that the monarch should be replaced by a New Zealand head of state, along with Sir Paul Reeves who has indicated that he would not oppose a republic. Sir Paul has since indicated that he did not wish to become involved in any debate on the matter. However another former Governor-General, Sir Michael Hardie Boys, has supported the status quo stating "If it ain't broke, don't fix it"[9]. On 29 July 2006, outgoing Governor-General Dame Silvia Cartwright has stated that she has no views as to whether New Zealand becomes a republic, noting: "I'm the Queen's representative in New Zealand ...we often overlook the intense loyalty and love the Māori people have for the Queen - probably more intense than many people of European descent. This is a history that's never going to die."[29].

[edit] See also

[edit] New Zealand

[edit] Other Commonwealth Realms

[edit] External links

[edit] References

  1. ^ A Sunday Star-Times poll, published 20 January 2006, stated there was 47% support for a New Zealand republic, and 47% support for the monarchy.
  2. ^ Te Ara - William Hobson. Retrieved on 2006-07-12.
  3. ^ History NZ - Parihaka. Retrieved on 2006-07-12.
  4. ^ Republican Movement - Parihaka - New Zealand's first republic?; by Evan Roberts. Retrieved on 2006-07-12.
  5. ^ Te Ara - Hawera, Republic of. Retrieved on 2006-07-12.
  6. ^ The way we were, Jonathan Milne, April 1996 source
  7. ^ Colin James, The New Zealand Herald, 19 February 2002: Source
  8. ^ The Prime Minister may advise the Queen to recall the Governor-General at any time, so long as the Prime Minister enjoys the support of the House of Representatives. The Queen is bound by convention to implement the advice of her Prime Minister.
  9. ^ a b ">Jonathan Milne. Ditch Queen, say former Governors-General: New Zealand Herald. Retrieved on 2006-08-02.
  10. ^ The People vs the Crown, Jonathan Milne, Sunday Star-Times, May 30 2004
  11. ^ David McIntyre, The Strange Death of Dominion Status, Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History, 1999 pp 193, 196. Retrieved on 2006-12-07.
  12. ^ David Cunliffe: Address-In-Reply speech 4 September 2002. Retrieved on 2006-11-11.
  13. ^ National Business Review, March 24 2000
  14. ^ National refuses to take part in constitution review The New Zealand Herald, 14 November 2004
  15. ^ Gordon Campbell. For Queen or Country?: New Zealand Listener - March 2005. Retrieved on 2006-08-02.
  16. ^ Final Report of the Constitutional Inquiry, 11 August 2005
  17. ^ Monarchist League of New Zealand Press release 18 March 2006
  18. ^ Republican Movement of Aotearoa New Zealand Press release 18 March 2006
  19. ^ Republican Movement of Aotearoa New Zealand Press release 18 February 2004
  20. ^ BBC: Everest hero backs Queen in NZ; Tuesday, 26 February, 2002. Retrieved on 2006-10-17.
  21. ^ A New Zealand Herald poll published 26 December 2000 showed 62% support for a republic amongst Māori, as opposed to 41% support for a republic from Pākehā
  22. ^ The Evening Post 23 February 2002
  23. ^ 'President Helen' in the Huskings, New Zealand Herald editorial, 29 March 2005
  24. ^ David Cunliffe: Address-In-Reply speech. Retrieved on 2006-08-01.
  25. ^ Daily Hansard: Clerk of the House of Representatives, Thursday, 16 December 2004. Retrieved on 2006-08-01.
  26. ^ Daily Hansard: Clerk of the House of Representatives, Tuesday, 26 August 2003. Retrieved on 2006-08-11.
  27. ^ Why Prince Charles Should not be King, Keith Locke, Sunday News, 13 March 2005 source
  28. ^ Christian Heritage New Zealand: Policy. Retrieved on 2006-07-21.
  29. ^ Carroll du Chateau. Dame Silvia Cartwright's majestic presence: New Zealand Herald. Retrieved on 2006-09-11.
Republicanism in Commonwealth Realms
Australia | Canada | New Zealand | United Kingdom
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/e/p/Republicanism_in_New_Zealand_9d0e.html"