Hughes Gareth: Head of State Referenda Bill — First Reading 
Hughes Gareth: Head of State Referenda Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:662;Page:10379] 
GARETH HUGHES (Green) 
: 
 Kia ora Mr Deputy Speaker. Nga mihi nui ki a koutou kia ora. I welcome the chance to start the conversation on our head of State. I believe that it is time for New Zealand to have the conversation. Changing demographic trends the monarchy’s growing clash with our culture and sense of egalitarianism and our cherished democratic principles all mean that constitutional change is inevitable. Tonight we have maybe a once-in-a-lifetime chance and what do we gain from putting off the inevitable debate? 
The Green MPs will tonight be voting in support of Keith Locke’s Head of State Referenda Bill which will give Kiwis the chance to vote on whether we should investigate changing our constitution. I pay tribute to Keith in what has been a 7-year journey up to this evening. A few months back I was sworn in as an MP and recited an oath pledging allegiance to the Queen and her heirs. It was so jarring as a Kiwi to pledge loyalty to a foreign lady albeit a nice grandmotherly one who lives on the other side of the world. I have never met her never seen her and never voted for her yet because of a quirk of history she is our head of State and I had to declare allegiance to her if I wanted to take my seat in this honourable House. For years we have avoided the conversation. Let us have an informed discussion at the select committee now that we have the chance. 
New Zealand with the Queen as our head of State is like the stereotypical adult still living at home with his or her parents. We are like those grown-up adults who talk about maybe getting their own place who maybe concede that it is one day inevitable that they will move out. Those stereotypical stay-at-home adults even if their mates who left the nest earlier laugh at them and say they are not independent argue: “Hey it’s all pretty cruisy being at home; it doesn’t mean much.” or as Simon Bridges said: “It’s not really that pressing to be leaving right now.” 
Like those stereotypical stay-at-home adults New Zealanders have their independence in practice. We can stay out as late as we want do our own washing even bring our partner home but hey it is embarrassing to bring her home to the place where we are under our parent’s roof and where their rules rule. New Zealand’s situation is just like that. New Zealand is not regarded as a fully independent nation that is independent of the United Kingdom. It is time we start that conversation. Do we stay or do we pluck up the courage to step out on our own get a flat get some furniture and be master of our own house or do we want to stay with granny? It is time to have the debate; it is inevitable. I am sure that most members in this House would agree with former Prime Minister Jim Bolger that it is inevitable. All the trends point towards constitutional change one day. Why avoid talking about it now? 
Our current head of State clashes with our sense of place in the world. We are no longer the Britain of the South Seas. Our links to Britain are in decline. Britain has not been our largest trading partner since 1973. At the last census 879000 people or just 22 percent of our total population were not born in New Zealand. We are an independent multicultural nation in practice. We should have a debate as to whether we should be that in theory. Our current head of State clashes with our young people’s vision of the future. 
A new generation is growing up that sees New Zealand as a proud independent country that is more Pacific than European. My generation has grown up with Britain in the EU with New Zealand out of ANZUS and with our biggest trading partner now being China. Research from 2008 shows support for the monarchy was lowest in those aged 15 to 39 and strongest in those aged over 60. That means that constitutional change is inevitable. 
Lastly our current head of State arrangements clash with our culture and egalitarianism. Our head of State institution is discriminatory. Since only recently and with provisos could Catholics and women become a head of State. It goes against the Human Rights Act that protects against discrimination on the basis of sex age religion and ethnicity. 
Let us ask the people whether they want a head of State 1600 miles away who has been here only 10 times since 1954 and who leads a very different life from anyone in this country. Let us have the debate on how this will impact Te Tiriti o Waitangi. Let us be open that the Queen has devolved all responsibility to the New Zealand Government but that a special relationship exists between the Crown and iwi. Let us have the discussion and be sure that there is no risk that Governments could use republicanism to evade Treaty responsibilities. We can delay this important debate for another few years or decades but why? I urge members opposite to pluck up the courage and give us the chance to have this important debate at a select committee. 
In summary this is an important debate about who we are as a nation. We are a democratic nation and we should be emphasising that power should come from the people from tangata whenua not governed by a foreigner 1600 miles away. I will vote for Keith Locke’s bill and support opening the discussion. It is time for Kiwis to decide. Let us have that debate.