Republicanism in New Zealand is the political position that New Zealand's system of government should be changed from a constitutional monarchy to a republic.
New Zealand republicanism dates back to the 19th century, but it was only a fringe movement until the late 20th century. The main current republican lobby group, New Zealand Republic, was established in 1994.
Contemporary republican debate in New Zealand focuses on the issues of constitutional reform and New Zealand's independence. The matter of the Crown's obligations under the Treaty of Waitangi, and the treaty settlement process, is cited as a constitutional issue for a New Zealand republic. Most proponents of a republic support a parliamentary republic with the head of state separate from the head of government, with the head of state having limited power.
Because New Zealand's constitution is uncodified, a republic could be enacted by statute, as a simple act of parliament. It is generally assumed that this would only occur following a nationwide referendum. Several prime ministers and governors-general have identified themselves as republicans, but no government has yet taken any meaningful steps towards enacting a republic.
History The term "republic" in New Zealand has been used as a protest and a pejorative against the central government and/or royalty, to describe an area independent of the central government.
19th century The first use of the term "republic" to connote 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 constitution and governing council, as such. The existence of the council prompted Hobson to declare British sovereignty over the entirety of New Zealand on 21 May 1840, despite the fact the Treaty of Waitangi was still being signed throughout the country. Hobson dispatched the Colonial Secretary, Willoughby Shortland along with some soldiers to demand the settlers disband their "illegal association" and remove the flag of the United Tribes of New Zealand.
Later, Wellington became the centre of agitation by settlers for representative government, which was granted by the New Zealand Constitution Act 1852. Samuel Revans, who founded the Wellington Settlers' Constitutional Association in 1848, advocated a New Zealand republic.
In 1879 the people of Hāwera declared themselves the "Republic of Hawera," due to a campaign by Māori leader Te Whiti against European settlement. They formed their own volunteer units to oppose Te Whiti. In 1881 government troops invaded Parihaka and arrested Te Whiti, bringing the "republic" to an end.
20th century In the 1911 general election Colonel Allen Bell, the Reform Party candidate for the Raglan seat, advocated the abolition of the monarchy. The armed forces considered that Bell had broken his Oath of Allegiance. He was asked to resign his commission, which he did in January 1912.
In 1966 Bruce Jesson founded the Republican Association of New Zealand, and later the Republican Party in 1967. The party had a stridently nationalist platform. Republican Party activity petered out after the 1969 general election and the party wound up in 1974.
In May 1973, a remit was proposed at the Labour Party national conference to change the flag, declare New Zealand a republic, and change the national anthem (then only "God Save the Queen"), but this was voted down.
In March 1994 the Republican Coalition of New Zealand was formed to promote the move to a republic. The following year, the Monarchist League of New Zealand (now Monarchy New Zealand) was established to defend the constitutional monarchy.WHAT IS THE MONARCHIST LEAGUE OF NEW ZEALAND?, Monarchist League of New Zealand, 2 May 2001
In 1994 Prime Minister Jim Bolger suggested to the 44th Parliament in the Address In Reply debate that New Zealand should move to become a republic by 2001. Bolger stated that New Zealand's links with Britain were in decline, and that the country should acknowledge that "the tide of history is moving in one direction"; when accused by Labour MP Trevor Mallard of "reading Paul Keating speeches, a reference to the then Prime Minister of Australia, Bolger replied "I do not read Labor Party speeches".Address In Reply, New Zealand Parliament, 8 March 1994 He denied that his views relate to his Irish heritage.
Bolger spoke to Queen Elizabeth about the issue of New Zealand becoming a republic when he was prime minister and recalled "I have more than once spoken with Her Majesty about my view that New Zealand would at some point elect its own Head of State, we discussed the matter in a most sensible way and she was in no way surprised or alarmed and neither did she cut my head off."
In 1998, Richard Nottage, the Secretary of Foreign Affairs and Trade, called for New Zealand to consider becoming a republic, arguing that the position of the "British monarch" as head of state "looks strange in Asian eyes".National Business Review, 27 March 1998, cited by Raymond Miller in New Zealand: Government and Politics, Oxford University Press, 2001, page 59
In 1999 the Republican Coalition relaunched itself as the Republican Movement of Aotearoa New Zealand, similar to the Australian Republican Movement, due to the 1999 Australian republic referendum, and again renamed itself in 2014 as New Zealand Republic.
21st century
In November 2004, Prime Minister Helen Clark announced the formation of a parliamentary committee of inquiry, the Constitutional Arrangements Committee, chaired by United Future New Zealand leader Peter Dunne. In its final report, the committee recommended wider education on the constitution and included a note on the republic issue, asking "Is the nature of New Zealand's head of state, as a monarch, appropriate to New Zealand's evolving national and constitutional identity?".
Keith Locke's Head of State Referenda Bill for a referendum on the republic issue was drawn from the members' ballot and introduced into Parliament on 14 October 2009. The bill focused on reforming the governor-general of New Zealand as a ceremonial head of state, creating a parliamentary republic. Two models of a republic along with the status quo would have been put to a referendum: Election of the head of state indirectly by a supermajority of members of Parliament, similar to the bi-partisan appointment model proposed in Australia; Election of the head of state directly by the New Zealand electorate using the Single Transferable Vote electoral system, similar to Ireland. On 21 April 2010 the bill was defeated at its first reading 53–68(21 April 2010) 662 New Zealand Parliamentary Debates 10373. with voting recorded as Ayes 53 being New Zealand Labour 43; Green Party 9; United Future 1 and Noes 68 being New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; Māori Party 4; Progressive 1.
The debate
Arguments for change Supporters of a New Zealand republic have said: New Zealand should have a New Zealander, or more correctly a New Zealand citizen resident in New Zealand, as its head of state; 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. New Zealand already maintains the governor-general—who is described as a "virtual head of state". The governor-general is a New Zealander and does everything the head of state should do; Because the sovereign and governor-general have little real power, they are not an effective check on the parliamentary executive (the prime minister and Cabinet), the argument that the sovereign or governor-general "denies power" to politicians and is politically neutral yet can fire a prime minister is contradictory; An elected or appointed head of state would be a more effective check on the executive; A republic does not necessarily mean withdrawing from the Commonwealth. As of June 2022, 36 out of the 56 member states (65%) are republics. The prime minister should not have the power to dismiss the governor-general at will and vice versa.
Other republicans have focused on the principles of a monarchy: many disagree with the hereditary principle (based on a form of primogeniture) that determines succession of the throne. They argue that in a modern and democratic society no one should be expected to defer to another simply because of their birth. Some assert that the hereditary monarch and unelected governor-general have no mandate to dismiss an elected government.
At the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting of October 2011, the leaders of the 16 Commonwealth realms agreed that they would support change to their respective succession laws regarding male primogeniture, and allow the monarch to marry a Roman Catholic. The ban on Catholics from being the monarch would remain, because the monarch has to be in "Communion with the Church of England."
Arguments against change Supporters of the monarchy in New Zealand have said: "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". For New Zealand, "monarchy summarises the inheritance of a thousand years of constitutional government and our links with a glorious past," New Zealand is already an independent, sovereign nation with a national identity of its own; The monarchy is a symbol of unity between New Zealand and the other Commonwealth realms that share the same person as monarch; part of a "global family". The monarch is politically neutral and is a symbol of national unity rather than division; The monarch has "little real practical political powers and is a protector of and not a threat to democracy"; Hereditary selection of the sovereign is the "most natural" non-partisan way to choose a leader.
Cost Supporters of the monarchy have argued that it costs New Zealand taxpayers only a small outlay for royal engagements and tours, and the modest expenses of the governor-general's establishment. They state "[t]his figure is about one dollar per person per year", about $4.3 million per annum. An analysis by New Zealand Republic in 2010 wrote that the office of governor-general cost New Zealand taxpayers about $7.6 million in ongoing costs. They compared this cost to the president of Ireland, a head of state of a country with a similar population size, who cost €3.4 million – NZ$6 million on the exchange rate at the time. Monarchy New Zealand said that republicanism supporters arbitrarily inflated the costs on the governor-general, instead stating that the Irish President's cost was closer to NZ$12.8 million once the extra costs were included.
Public opinion DateParticipantsFirmRepublicMonarchyNeutral/UndecidedLeadNotes6 February – 23 March 20232,012Lord Ashcroft34%6%29 September – 6 October 20221,016Talbot Mills27%36%17–21 September 2022not stated1News Kantar27%23%Not stated if weighedNovember 2021not stated1News Kantar33%20%Not stated if weighed22–26 October 20201,003Research New Zealand20%36%Online poll8–24 April 20191,000Curia39%6%Non-standard question26 November – 3 December 2008500Research New Zealand42%9%Non-standard question , the New Zealand public were generally in favour of the retention of the monarchy, with polls showing it to have between 50 and 70% support. Polls indicate that many New Zealanders see the monarchy as being of little day-to-day relevance; a One News/Colmar Brunton poll in 2002 found that 58% of the population believed the monarchy has little or no relevance to their lives. National Business Review poll in 2004 found 57% of respondents believed New Zealand would become a republic "in the future".