Norman Russel: New Zealand Flag Referendums Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeNorman Russel: New Zealand Flag Referendums Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 13 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5825. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Dr RUSSEL NORMAN (Green): I rise on behalf of the Green Party to speak on the New Zealand Flag Referendums Bill. This bill of course is a classic form over substance bill. The form of course is what the actual pattern is on the flag—the flag that flies out in front of Parliament the flag that is on all of the New Zealand First benches in here today the flag that is here there and everywhere.But you know at the end of the day a flag is a pattern. So really it is about saying that some people want to change the pattern. But the reason why the pattern of a flag matters is that it actually refers to a deeper substance and the deeper substance that it refers to is about the constitutional arrangements of the country. That is the thing that really matters.Part of the reason why I guess New Zealand First is pretty agitated about it is that it sees the Union Jack in the corner of the flag as representing the monarchy and the links to the monarchy—and fair enough. You know I can understand that but if you believe in independence and democracy and you want to cut the links to the monarchy to actually have a proper republican democracy involving the Treaty of Waitangi then of course you do not particularly want the Union Jack on the flag.What the Government is proposing to do is to change the pattern without changing any of the substance. So it is having this big kind of hoopla and saying “Oh we’re doing something really substantive. We’re doing something very important. We’re doing something big. This is big; this is visionary. We’re changing the flag.” as if something underneath were changing. But of course nothing whatsoever is changing underneath. The Prime Minister awarded Prince Philip an Order of New Zealand for goodness’ sake just like Tony Abbott did. Basically it has been years since we have had such a fawning Prime Minister over the British monarchy. I mean I have never seen anything like it. So in terms of the substance underneath it nothing changes.If you wanted a referendum that actually had real substance the asset sales referendum was a referendum about real substance: should we privatise these assets? People voted not to privatise the assets; the Government completely ignored them of course. What it really wants is a show and so we are going to have the flag debate show which is really what the Government wants rather than discussing the true substance.At this very moment we are having a debate about the Trans-Pacific Partnership which changes the constitutional arrangements of New Zealand in a very fundamental way through the investor-State dispute settlement clauses. As the former Director-General of the World Trade Organization said they are writing a new constitution for a new world order. So that fundamentally changes the New Zealand constitution by setting up a judicial system outside of New Zealand. At the same time as we are having this show called the flag debate all about what the pattern on this flag should be over here the Government is actually fundamentally really altering the constitution to take away the democratic right of decision making over Government policy. That of course is the reality of what is going on. So the show goes on over here: a show about the flag and what should be printed on the flag.Over here the reality goes on: power is being taken away from ordinary New Zealanders and assets are being sold. Those are the real issues. In terms of the relationship with the British Crown and the ridiculous idea that the head of State should be determined by birth—ha ha! What a ridiculous idea. Let us have the head of State determined by birth—you know what if someone came up with that? “Oh we’re going to let them be chosen by birth.” What a great way to choose the head of State! So instead of having a debate about something real and substantive—whether the head of State should be chosen by the Parliament or by the people through an election something like that; an actual substantive thing—we are going to have the flag show. We are going to have the flag show and the Prime Minister will say that this is his thing. This is his great vision of independence for the country.At the same time he is actually selling out our independence and our real democracy and the things that really matter: the ability to determine what kinds of regulation we have about the environment and about health care. They are stripping away through the Trans-Pacific Partnership and other kinds of deals like that the right of people to actually determine the issues that really matter to people—about environmental protection; well you name it.So one of the real issues for the Greens in this is that we are having this debate around this pattern which is all about optics and the Prime Minister’s vision so that it looks like he has a long-term vision for this country while at the same time the real issues that really matter—another 45000 children living in poverty as we discovered today—are being swept under the carpet and actually swept under the carpet behind the light show that is the Prime Minister’s flag show.