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