Stepping out on our own - Republic or Monarchy?

The question is a confounding one.  Due largely to a population that has an English heritage the Monarchy argument seems to be the one to remain, The Crown and the King/Queen (as Head of State further known as HoS) are currently favoured.  But more and more New Zealand born people even from that heritage are now plumping for a Republic free of the shackles of a titular HoS off our shores.  Judging by the passion in debates seen on Twitter, Facebook, and other social media, the Republic side is growing in popularity.  So what of that debate?

The current HoS is fast approaching the end of her reign and to be honest the offerings coming through aren't entirely in the best interest of New Zealand.  So it would be very fair now for New Zealanders to voice their opinion on the situation going forward when she does pass on.  Personally I think the links with the British Monarchy should be severed for good but this brings a raft of issues and the key one is the "relationship" Maori have with the Crown through the Treaty of Waitangi (ToW).  This arrangement needs to be handled very carefully if indeed we do become a republic.  But a way around that is to start robust discussion (already underway - Consitution conversation ) and to actively seek not only a way to see the future but to make sure the ToW founding document is set in place as our continuing "founding" document.  But a note of caution.  Some Maori (and pakeha) still use Queen Victoria as a HoS when referring to the ToW so it's fair to say these folks will be hard to sway when discussing a Constitution.

The Treaty is and will always be the medium we base our society on.  Maori as partners have a vested interest to save their heritage, way of life, and resources.  Pakeha too have to abide by it as interlopers in this country.  Both are willing to share, and equally willing to share amicably and equitably.  Anyone willing to discuss a Constitution without the ToW will find their cause stymied all the way here in Aotearoa.

And Aotearoa?  A name also needs to be addressed, along with a flag and a national anthem.  I'm not saying that all things be changed to  a Maori name or idea, but seriously what does New Zealand mean?  To be fair my opinion is this.  New is a cheap way of replicating something else and in this case honours the first European to "discover" New Zealand.  History shows that even Maori didn't have naming rights and that Mori Ori perhaps should have had that honour, or at least a new name to honour their discovery.  But for me Aotearoa rings true.  It is us, it is this country, it is honouring the people that have had a long history here.

And the flag.  Well debate has raged for years on this.  The obvious point made is that our flag gets confused with our near neighbours selection.  So time to change?  Yes!!  And the best time is when the current monarch passes on her mantle and Aotearoa becomes adrift from any Crown entity. (Change the Flag)  The flag needs to represent this country for it's future generations, not it's past heritage although it would be prudent to identify the past to move that future, but not be dominant.

Yeah my design, it's too busy but it honours both Treaty partners and incorporates the emblems that best define our country heading into the future.

And what about the National Anthem.  Well to be honest it is great.  But with less than 25% of this country being practicing Christians or other, the use of God should be abolished.  Tough call, but Aussie did it, why can't we.  Their anthem is short, sweet and catchy and many millions know it well.  How many Kiwi's can recite the second verse of ours?  Yup me neither.

So friends and foes, time to continue the debate.  Time to set our future up for our generations to follow.  Time to have your say.  I think I have opened the doors to debate and looking forward to some robust and hearty banter as it should be.