“Time to sever the tie with these soap opera characters,” wrote Joe Bennett in Stuff of the British Royal Family.
I totally agree. Along with Australia and Canada, plus a handful of tiny island states, every other Commonwealth state has already done this.
Royalists ascribe absurd almost magical powers to monarchs, which are sheer nonsense given they have none.
If we must have a purported “royal” from 12,000 miles away as our nominal head of state then my pick is Meaghan who unlike the screamingly goofy Charles, is at least visually pleasing.
But far better to finally grow up and elect our own Head of State, confined to say single 5 year terms. His or her role would be largely ceremonial other than in hung Parliament situations, something we’ve yet to experience.
Ireland provides the perfect example. Alternatively, as with the USA let it be the top judicial individual in the country.
The Brits reaction to the well-signaled Queen’s demise is ludicrous and a repeat of their carry-on following Princess Diana’s death. That said, I admired Di’s honesty when she accurately once said of herself “I’m as thick as a plank,” being excellent credentials for the role.
It’s not safe to become a republic until Helen Clark and Jim Bolger are both dead.
Hmm, reading between the lines then it will never be safe. I’m up for keeping the Windsors.
Before everyone jumps on board with Sir Bob, or perhaps to be the ex-Sir Bob; this is why we ought keep the system – https://youtu.be/_5os9bT9zuo
Yes suggestion was made to replace with Maori king 😵💫🧐
People have forgotten they took off peoples heads not so long ago…and a recent rerun of the movie Robinhood should have brought back a few of those memories..
The UK are not the dominant economic force they once were, and washed their hands of us in the 1970’s with the removal of farm trade…It was probably them that called in the loans in Muldoon’s attempt to make us independent of their oil..
And lets not mention the now bankrupt central banking system that all started there, is now nothing more than a parasite to the rest of us…
The concept of a republic is attractive to the left as it involves things that are dear to their collective hearts i.e. an unnecessary additional layer of bureaucracy and a way to funnel taxpayer funds to their anointed luvvie supporters. I thought that if any Commonwealth country would become a republic, it would be Australia but whenever this has been put to a referendum, it has failed rather miserably. It is commendable that our PM pro tem has latched onto a somewhat tired idea that will prove to be even less popular with voters than the current three waters and co-governance extortion schemes. I wish her the best of luck with all of these as we approach the 2023 General Election. Get the popcorn.
Knight hoods are ok….just not the onezzz in Auckland,
The upside of royalty is that we don’t have to bother choosing and funding our own nonentity. It’s been hard to see the downside lately.
Its an odd system, but is it really any worse than “El Presidente”? It essentially reflects the hundreds of years of civil wars that finished with the primacy of Parliament. Gough-Whitlam aside that’s been fairly successful. Who would risk letting a chap like Trump have ultimate control over the parliament?
North Korea has a good system: their “Eternal President” is one Kim Il Sung. Since he died in 1994, he does not interfere in current politics; he will not suddenly be discovered engaging in sexual harassment, bribery, or other embarrassing behaviours; and the operation of his office is virtually cost-free.
I propose Sir Edmund Hillary as our permanent Head of State. He is universally respected, would certainly not start interfering in politics, and already has his picture on some of our banknotes. He could give formal assent to legislation via a rubber stamp wielded on his behalf. (That is almost identical to the current procedure where the rubber stamp is called a “Governor-General”.) The oaths taken by public and military officials could swear loyalty to him personally, and any difficult problem of policy could be resolved by asking “What would Ed do?”
Best of all, it would avoid any risk of appointing or electing ex-politicians to embody the State.
Replacing an institution with a politician doesn’t sound like a good idea. And it would leave the Treaty without much moral force.
I am for tradition and stability. Consider this – you might find a Trump, or even better still, a Biden and his puppetry pullers leading a ragtag group. Rather a stuffed shirt, accompanied with manners and with less politicizing ideas, than an idealist. Be careful what you wish for. It seldom happens.