Andrew Little on flag and republic

One Breakfast this morning Andrew Little said he wants to revisit a new flag “sooner rather than later” and he would discuss a republic referendum “at the end of the reign of the current monarch”.

One News: Should New Zealand become a republic? Labour leader signals referendum plan

In the wake of the flag referendum, the opposition leader said he voted against the alternative as it “doesn’t reflect anything about New Zealand at all”.

Many people seem to think that the Southern Cross on blue reflects quite a bit about New Zealand. And many more think that the fern on black reflects quite a bit too.

43% voted for a combination  of both, which is quite a bit more than Labour’s 27% vote in the last election.

Does Little think that Labour doesn’t reflect anything about New Zealand at all?

Mr Little said the country should revisit the issue “sooner rather than later”, suggesting a flag that “genuinely represents who we are, the diversity that is New Zealand”.

If Labour revisits a change of flag sooner rather than later they risk being ridiculed for their hypocrisy.

Little opposed a flag that was supported by John Key, but somehow thinks he can come up with a flag that “genuinely represents who we are, the diversity that is New Zealand”.  The diversity of New Zealand pretty much guarantees Little’s preference won’t make all New Zealanders feel genuinely represented.

When asked if a republic referendum is something he would do in power, Mr Little said it is something he would discuss.

“I would do that at the end of the reign of the current monarch, have a good public debate,” he said.

Good luck with trying to have a good public debate. The country couldn’t even debate a flag change like adults.

“To me the big issue is… a sense of identity, standing on our own two feet.

“The way to do this is to have a Head of State who’s not living in London but in New Zealand.”

If he really thinks the big issue is “a sense of identity, standing on our own two feet” why wait until the current monarch has died?

Did he wait until his mother died before he left home, developed a sense of identity and stood on his own feet?

 

Leave a comment

49 Comments

  1. Iceberg

     /  29th March 2016

    “ridiculed for their hypocrisy”

    It’s the start of another day, Little will be ridiculed for something. Hypocrisy was last Tuesday, what about Sanctimony today?

    Reply
  2. Gezza

     /  29th March 2016

    Why wait for dear old Liz to cark it? She’s probably not bovvered if we want to become a republic. 16 Commonwealth countries are republics already. If we don’t get it underway and Liz passes over we’ll end up with Charlie as our head of state which I think should be avoided on the grounds he’s a bit of dork and his mum’s not.

    Let’s just start the republic debate anyway: it’ll run for a few years. We can pick up the flag issue again when the republic debate’s getting somewhere.

    Reply
  3. Patzcuaro

     /  29th March 2016

    Nice analogy about leaving home, in NZ’s case we are still living with our great great great grand parents or maybe even 4 greats. Time to leave home.

    Reply
  4. Richard

     /  29th March 2016

    Little’s vanity project, something about starving kids, a beach towel, flawed process, soldiers fought and died etc etc.

    Reply
  5. Oliver

     /  29th March 2016

    The Flag was Keys vanity project. I think Little will let the people decide what they want by making the flag choice more democratic. Keys stuffed up by choosing the flag for us, dictatorship doesn’t work in a democracy.

    Reply
    • Iceberg

       /  29th March 2016

      “Keys stuffed up by choosing the flag for us” Were you born on the morning of the referendum?

      Reply
    • Patzcuaro

       /  29th March 2016

      It might have been Key’s “Vanity” project but it was Labour Party policy!

      Reply
      • Kitty Catkin

         /  29th March 2016

        Oliver must have missed the other vote where we chose the alternative flag from however many designs it was.

        He also missed hearing that it was Labour’s idea, although Labour seems to have missed that, too.

        Reply
  6. artcroft

     /  29th March 2016

    It was all so inevitable. Labour won the war but fought on the wrong side. What losers.

    Reply
  7. Patzcuaro

     /  29th March 2016

    “Cultural Marxists” on the prowl again. Seems that some in the Labour Party oppose people flying anything but the current flag. Apparently the current flag is not good enough for the Labour Party logo but the rest of us have to fly it.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11613179

    Reply
    • i think Moroney was being an idiot rather than a cultural marxist .

      Reply
      • Patzcuaro

         /  29th March 2016

        I agree sounds like she wasn’t flavour of the day at caucus

        Reply
        • Kitty Catkin

           /  29th March 2016

          Sue Moroney was described by a man I know-a very tolerant gentleman-as the rudest woman he had ever met. I can well believe it. She behaved so childishly rudely at a meet the candidates meeting that the MC warned her that if she didn’t stop it she’d be told to leave. She kept reeling back, shaking her head and saying disbelievingly ‘What ????’ when other people were talking,laughing cynically and later mouthing ‘What ?’ when she was asked to be quiet. She was a total embarrassment to Labour. I would imagine-if she’d been my party candidate, I’d have been wondering if I wanted a Labour MP that badly. I saw her at the Chinese New Year do, and one would have thought that it was in her honour.

          Her idea (and I swear that I am not making this up) of paying for the extended maternity leave was to make the replacements pay more tax-how to make sure that nobody wants to be one. I would doubt the legality of this, anyway, even if I didn’t think it grossly unjust that some workers should be expected to work for less than others doing the same job.

          Reply
  8. Patzcuaro

     /  29th March 2016
    Reply
  9. I agree with Little, it needs to be part of the wider debate. If we are going to change the flag, then change it. The ‘KEY-flag’ was just a AB fern pasted over the Union jack.. hardly a real change… more like a ‘Team Key’ logo on a teatowel ! 😀

    It sounds like the debate needs to start.. BUT do we have another $26mil to throw on the fire.. I don’t think so.. not in the near future :/ 😦

    Reply
  10. The big problem with republics is the way they impose the civil system by stealth, completely undermining any claim on constitutional sovereignty; they are the embodiment of unfettered statism. The remedy involves knowing why wisdom is an essential part of sovereignty and recognizing that despite their best intentions the public is typically foolish in their appraisal of the forces shaping society.

    Reply
  11. Brown

     /  29th March 2016

    This is Little doing something smart – at last because of the following:
    – There appears a useful number that want a change of flag but didn’t like the alternative.
    – Key’s design flopped really so the door remains open to an alternative.
    – Key has said he didn’t think we’d become a republic in his lifetime so appears disinclined to press for that.

    Because of the above Little has a glimpse of an opening that allows him to be seen as relevant and Key would look very flimsy grabbing all this over again for a second shot.

    Reply
    • Pantsdownbrown

       /  29th March 2016

      Labour will be seen for the hypocrites they are in sabotaging the flag referendum, a referendum that followed to a letter that set out in Labour’s own policy on the matter.

      Reply
  12. Patzcuaro

     /  29th March 2016

    If nothing else the flag referendum has increased the impetus towards at least discussion of becoming a republic.

    Reply
    • Oliver

       /  29th March 2016

      We can thank Labour for getting the ball rolling.

      Reply
      • Gezza

         /  29th March 2016

        It hasn’t really rolled very far yet. Be interesting to see if it picks up any speed…

        Reply
      • Kitty Catkin

         /  29th March 2016

        Oh, come on, Ollie, you can’t have it both ways. You seem to be opposed to the flag thing when National supports it and in favour when Labour does. Make up your mind.

        Reply
  13. Either having a monarchy and the current flag is a good thing you believe in or it isn’t. I personally don’t think either are for various reasons. But linking the discussion about this to the death of the exisiting monarch ( and I have heard Key do the same ) is just bonkers .

    Reply
  14. spanish_tudor

     /  29th March 2016

    Anyone who thinks the passing of the current Queen will hasten the change to a republic is a fool. When Elizabeth II dies (for most of us, the only sovereign we have ever known), there will be weeks and weeks of coverage, commemoration, the funeral, etc – all with a massive amount of goodwill. The coronation of the new monarch (presumably the Prince of Wales) will be covered with the same amount of hoopla and goodwill. This, coupled with the interest in the next generation – the Cambridges and Prince Harry (who must be due to marry soon, meaning another royal wedding and popularity boost for the monarchy) – will sustain the interest in and affection for the monarchy for many years to come.

    Reply
    • Elizabeth II isn’t a sovereign in the constitutional sense of the word. The masses are for the most part blissfully unaware of the dark side of the house of Windsor.

      Reply
  15. Alan Wilkinson

     /  29th March 2016

    And the idiot Left wonder why Key is Teflon coated. This fool couldn’t run a corner dairy. Neither could the Greens. At least Rod Donald could and did.

    Reply
    • Zedd

       /  29th March 2016

      @AW

      & the idiot right couldn’t run a decent flag referendum.. ho ho ho hum :/

      btw: methinks his teflon coat is wearing even thinner.. by the day 😀

      Reply
      • Pantsdownbrown

         /  29th March 2016

        The only idiots were the ones that thought the flag referendum was actually an anti-Key vote………wasn’t that your position Zedd? if the hat fits……..

        Reply
        • Zedd

           /  29th March 2016

          .. well maybe.. BUT the reality was, I wasn’t voting to change the flag, to a worse one than we already have ! :/

          The idiots were those who voted for the change.. just because ‘Team Key’ were pushing it !!! if the shit fits 😀

          Reply
          • Pantsdownbrown

             /  29th March 2016

            Not many people I’m aware of voted for the alternative just because Key favoured it? I voted for the current flag – you see Zedd unlike left-wing sheep centre/centre-right voters can think for themselves, put the country’s interests before political beliefs, and not bring petty personal hatred of an individual into an important referendum.

            Reply
            • Zedd

               /  30th March 2016

              oh really… pull the other.. its got ‘bells’ on 😀

  16. Patzcuaro

     /  29th March 2016

    The Left’s problem is that Labour has 30%, the Greens 10-12% and NZ First 8-10%, a total of about 50% but how are they going to work together?
    National has 45-50% plus a couple of extras. It is finely balanced but the centre right is a much more concrete proposition. The centre left is a untried bloc of 3 parties that have never worked together before.
    I think that things will have to get a lot worse for the government before votes make such a jump into the unknown. The other option would be for one of the centre left parties to break through to the 40+% area to give more certainty/stability to the centre left bloc.

    Reply
  17. Regarding the topic … Pete, we’ve may need to accept that a Republican Constitutional discussion (or debate) will only involve a relatively small, interested and/or vociferous minority of the population – as most consultation at central and local government level does – and this will be guided by a committee or panel of experts. It will have to be under non-partisan government jurisdiction, I can’t see any other way. If we politicize republicanism we are genuinely f*%ked IMHO.

    Aside from the FCP meetings around the country, which were notably poorly attended, the ‘debate’ component of FCP was all digital, popularity, limited and minimal. The “What do we stand for” flagpole FCP website sideshow and a difficult, questionable “pairs” of flags voting system … I wasn’t even aware of the latter until afterwards.

    A better indication is 5,259 written submissions received by the Constitutional Advisory Panel 2011, who held public meetings, I can’t ascertain how many right now. They also used social media and encourage ongoing conversation –
    http://www.ourconstitution.org.nz/Recommendations

    Matike Mai Aotearoa: Iwi WG on Constitutional Transformation 2016 held 252 hui over 3 years, and their website was well resourced. I cannot ascertain individual participant numbers but I think they were significant –
    http://www.converge.org.nz/pma/MatikeMaiAotearoaReport.pdf

    This is the real work and will be done by those willing and able to do the real work. Part of it has already been done – see the above reports – and this is worth celebrating. It could be said we are already having the debate? There is a sound foundation to build on.

    I hope mechanisms can be devised to include the widest possible public discussion but ultimately “you can lead a horse to water” eh? Digital voting and polling. Social media. Blogs. Public meetings. Maybe public meetings which are also concerts for younger people?

    Experts, advisors, activists and interested parties can all be ‘informed’ by public opinion. For example, public flag design submissions? When the time comes – late in or after the Constitutional and Identity discussions – I think it would be foolish not to also employ bona-fide professional flag designers to develop themes and common design features?

    I find myself agreeing with Spanish Bride about waiting for QE II’s passing. The monarchy will be envigorated by it. Republicanism is another matter anyway, since we can be a Commonwealth Republic, but we don’t want the two getting all confused.

    The end of a GG’s term in 2021 or 2026 will suit me just fine. The sooner the better.

    Reply
    • First rethink – probably impossible not to politicize Constitutional Republicanism, perhaps especially where Te Tiriti o Waitangi and biculturalism are concerned? So the challenge will be somehow managing the politicization? e.g. some form of balanced, overarching adjudication?

      Reply
  18. Zedd

     /  30th March 2016

    @pdb

    another climate change denier.. “I see it, I hear it.. BUT I just don’t believe it”
    * must be mandatory for all you ‘tories’ regardless of the mounting evidence ?

    go on keep your head in the sand.. until it bites your ass :/

    Reply
  19. Pantsdownbrown

     /  30th March 2016

    Another fool who labels people ‘climate change deniers’ even though those people agree the climate changes, but naturally as it always has and not due mainly to human involvement.

    Every single claim of doom has not happened & with the passage of time computer projections have been wildly all over-stated or proven to be wrong. Rather than fight back with ‘facts’ (rather than ‘projections’) far better for the climate change/global warming/Co2 brigade to just attack the people that have legitimate questions over the money-making scam.

    David Bellamy: “Someone even emailed me [at the time] to say I was the worst paedophile in the world, basically saying I was killing children by denying global warming,”

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/david-bellamy-i-was-shunned-they-didnt-want-to-hear-8449307.html

    Reply
    • Zedd

       /  30th March 2016

      @pdb

      I dont see your point..

      1) The 10 hottest years on record, have been this century.. prove me wrong
      2) The North pole ice-sheet has been incrementally getting smaller & thinner over this time
      3) The Antarctic ice-sheets & glaciers are also retreating, at a similar rate
      4) Many of the pacific atolls are disappearing,, as the sea rises. This could start effecting Aotearoa/NZ soon !
      5) The CO2 (>350ppm) & Methane levels (Greenhouse gases) are confirmed as increasing : due to industrialisation, massive increases in dairy farming & burning of fossil fuels

      BUT.. I’m probably wasting my time trying to convince another Ostrich.. cause, it sounds like your head is buried so deep, you wont look at the evidence.. even if it does bite you behind

      you & others are just looking for ‘other evidence’ that its all ‘a natural cycle’ (good luck with that) :/ 😦

      Reply
      • Zedd

         /  30th March 2016

        btw: the Earth is a balanced ‘living. breathing system’ the balance is tilting a bit too far.. could tip over ?

        Its is not just a pile of resources to be exploited OR a garbage dump that will magically just keep renewing itself.. if we pray hard enough.

        …. here endeth another lesson…. 😦

        Reply
  20. Pantsdownbrown

     /  30th March 2016

    You obviously only read what you want to hear but anyhow for fun…..

    “The 10 hottest years on record, have been this century.. prove me wrong”

    You are WRONG actually as 1998 wasn’t this century – but the actual fraud of the ‘hottest ever’ figures (data manipulation, lowering of temperatures from previous decades, cherry picking recording stations etc) is better described here: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/02/02/2014-was-the-hottest-year-on-record-but-2015-is-hotter-than-2014-and-2016-could-be-hotter-than-2015/

    Regardless even if you believe the scientists figures in the last 40 years or so the average temperature (sea and land) has risen around 0.7 degrees – whoppee! and all well within an even small margin of error allowance (forgive me for not getting too excited).

    “The North pole ice-sheet has been incrementally getting smaller & thinner over this time
    3) The Antarctic ice-sheets & glaciers are also retreating, at a similar rate”

    True the Artic is currently shrinking but the Antarctic has been growing ( http://www.express.co.uk/news/nature/617144/Antarctica-not-shrinking-growing-ice-caps-melting ) – global doesn’t differentiate where you come from so the fact ice has reached record highs in Antarctica is somewhat of a problem for people like yourself…

    “Many of the pacific atolls are disappearing,, as the sea rises. This could start effecting Aotearoa/NZ soon!”

    Now you are grasping at straws – land masses have risen/ disappeared since time began, well before humans. Regardless thanks to some kiwis…….

    “But Paul Kench of the University of Auckland, New Zealand, and colleagues found no evidence of heightened erosion. After poring over more than a century’s worth of data, including old maps and aerial and satellite imagery, they conclude that 18 out of 29 islands have actually grown”.As a whole, the group grew by more than 18 hectares, while many islands changed shape or shifted sideways.”There is still considerable speculation that islands will disappear as sea level rises,” says Kench. “Our data indicates that the future of islands is significantly different.”

    “The CO2 (>350ppm) & Methane levels (Greenhouse gases) are confirmed as increasing”

    There is no concrete evidence that CO2 causes global warming – none. The global warming hiatus (that will get pro global warming people going!) during the same period of increased CO2 emissions suggest they are not related.

    http://www.climatechangedispatch.com/a-new-record-pause-no-global-warming-for-18-years-8-months.html

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s