Locke Keith: Head of State Referenda Bill — First Reading 
Locke Keith: Head of State Referenda Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:662;Page:10373] 
KEITH LOCKE (Green) 
: 
 I move  
That the Head of State Referenda Bill be now read a first time. 
 At the appropriate time I intend to move that the bill be considered by the Justice and Electoral Committee. This is an important moment in our constitutional history. It is the first time that Parliament has had before it a bill that would enable the people of New Zealand to decide whether to continue to have a member of the British Royal family as head of State or move to having a New Zealand head of State selected by democratic process. 
The bill provides for a referenda process where in the first ballot New Zealanders would choose between three options: the present system with the monarch remaining as our head of State; a New Zealand head of State determined by a 75 percent majority vote in Parliament; or a New Zealand head of State directly elected by the people via the single transferable vote preferential system where the successful candidate would be the first to reach 50 percent of the votes as the preferences are distributed. I have put all three options in the first ballot so that New Zealanders can have a full discussion of them and make an informed choice. If none of the three options gets 50 percent in the first referendum there would be a run-off referendum between the two leading options. The two alternatives to the monarchy in my bill are the two main types of non-executive President that we see around the world. The German President for example is selected by a committee from the Houses of Parliament whereas the Irish President is directly elected. 
I want to make it clear that a change from the monarchy would not under my bill result in a change in the technical powers of our head of State. That said a head of State selected by a democratic process might feel that little bit more independent of the Government of the day than the Governor-General who is both appointed by the incumbent Government and can in effect be sacked by that very same Government. You could call my bill a minimal change bill; we would not end up with an executive President like the American President. Some people have said “Well why bother?” if any change from a monarch would be minimal in its constitutional input. The answer is that I am responding to a significant body of New Zealand opinion particularly among those favouring a republic that we should get on with a referenda process. They do not want us to simply tail the Aussies and wait until they have another referendum. 
The main argument for a republic in both New Zealand and Australia is one of national identity. The question many New Zealanders ask is why we should have a head of State living on the other side of the world who is not a citizen of our country. There is also concern about whether our head of State should remain a monarch—that is somebody who inherits the job rather than gets it through a democratic process. The rules of inheritance for the monarch in Britain are also controversial. At present the succession rules discriminate against female heirs and Catholics in a way that is contrary to New Zealand’s human rights legislation. At present no one can ascend to the throne and become Queen or King of New Zealand if he or she is Catholic or even married to a Catholic. 
I stress that this debate is not about whether we like or dislike the Queen or any member of the Royal family. The present Queen has been competent in the performance of her duties and she turns 84 this very day. I wish her a happy birthday. 
However the Queen is in a difficult position as head of New Zealand. Firstly there is an inherent conflict of interest in the Queen being the head of State of two independent countries Britain and New Zealand that do not share the same foreign policy. For example when Britain sent troops into Iraq the Queen as Queen of Great Britain went down to the barracks in military dress to support the soldiers. That was in conflict with her role as Queen of New Zealand a country that opposed that same war. 
Secondly it is very difficult for the Queen to keep tabs on developments in a country on the other side of the world that she is not able to visit very often. Sure her representative the Governor-General lives here and is more hands-on. But the Governor-General is not fully independent because he or she is appointed by the Government of the day and can be sacked by that same Government via a Government recommendation to that effect which the Queen is in no position to refuse. Governors-General taking the Government’s side can be a problem as in Canada where 2 years ago the Governor-General suspended Parliament for a time when the Conservative Government was facing a no-confidence motion. Having a head of State who can operate with true independence is particularly important in our multiparty MMP system with its constitutional complexities. 
There is nervousness among some New Zealanders about changing from the present system. That is natural but let me allay some of the fears. The first fear is that a change might affect our commitment to the Treaty of Waitangi. I do not believe that is the case. Long ago the responsibility for upholding the Crown commitments to the Treaty was devolved to the Parliament and Government of New Zealand. The King or Queen of New Zealand is part of the mix but since 1947 that position has been constitutionally independent from the position of King or Queen of Great Britain. The Queen as Queen of New Zealand takes advice solely from the Government of New Zealand. The agency that signed the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840 the British Crown no longer constitutionally has any influence whatsoever on the domestic affairs of New Zealand including commitments to the Treaty of Waitangi. 
Another fear that people sometimes have is that if our head of State is the subject of direct election we might end up with a pop star a celebrity or a political hack. I believe that we should trust Kiwis to vote responsibly for such an important position. This is what happens overseas. Ireland has a directly elected President with minimal powers like those proposed in my bill and the Irish people have elected appropriate heads of State like the internationally renowned Mary Robinson who went on to become the United Nations Commissioner for Human Rights. 
Members may have noticed that the Attorney-General has issued a report that my bill offends the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act in one respect: by keeping the same electoral role for the first head of State referendum and the run-off referendum my bill discriminates against those people who turn 18 in the 6 months between the two referenda. I will propose to the select committee an amendment to correct that infringement. 
I appeal to those MPs who are not sure right now whether they support such a referenda process to at least allow consideration of it by the Justice and Electoral Committee. Even though the bill is a conscience vote in the Green caucus and we do not all see the issues in the same way all of the Green MPs will support this bill being referred to the select committee to allow both MPs and the public to fully debate the important constitutional issues embodied in the bill. 
I do not see this as a left or right issue. People across the political spectrum and across the community have formally endorsed my bill. They include Sir Robert Jones Dr Ranginui Walker Peta Mathias C K Stead Rob Hamill and Terence O’Brien. Whatever the fate of the bill tonight the issues we are debating will not go away. The momentum for change and the momentum for a referendum on our head of State are building every year. It would be a tribute to this House if it faced up to the reality now and allowed this bill to go to the Justice and Electoral Committee. 
Finally I pay tribute to the many people in the community who are keeping this debate alive from the Republican Movement of Aotearoa New Zealand to Monarchy New Zealand to many concerned citizens and legal experts. I will continue to work with them on these issues whatever the result of the vote tonight. Thank you.