Rocket Young Professionals chairman Ben Eagleson is against a flag change and does not believe the red peak design identifies with New Zealand as much as a silver fern. Photo / Andrew Warner
Rocket Young Professionals chairman Ben Eagleson is against a flag change and does not believe the red peak design identifies with New Zealand as much as a silver fern. Photo / Andrew Warner
The flag change process continues to come under major criticism despite the controversial red peak flag being added as a fifth option.
Rocket Young Professionals chairman Ben Eagleson said he liked the red peak design but did not think it identified with New Zealand as much as a silver fern.
"My view is that a referendum should have been taken initially on whether to retain the current flag or start the alternative flag consultation rather than just starting the consultation process.
"I'm also concerned that one of the flag panel judges had a conflict of interest regarding the promotion of the silver fern," he said. He was not in favour of a flag change.
Mount RSA president Derek Williams also questioned the need for a change.
"It's part of our heritage. I don't want to criticise our leader John Key, but the whole process could have been done quite differently. Why not put the current flag up with the other options in one referendum and allow people to vote whether they want to change our flag or not," he said.
Tauranga RSA president Heather Waldron agreed the process of not giving people the choice to vote for no change from the outset was "wrong".
Tauranga Mayor Stuart Crosby said the process had become "a political football".
"There has been a loss of focus on what the debate and referendum should be about."
Mr Crosby was concerned about the amount of money spent on the decision and the lack of early public interest.
Western Bay of Plenty District Council Mayor Ross Paterson said he had no problem with the red peak design being added because it gave people a greater choice.
"But I am concerned about how affordable the process is for the country. I do think there were more efficient ways of achieving the same outcome."
Wave Agency managing director Glenn Dougal said he was pleased to see the red peak design in the mix because it made the process "a little more robust". Mr Dougal said it was unfortunate that the flag consideration panel was not aided in their selections by design professionals.
"If it was a decision that was going to affect the health of the nation you would have a doctor on the panel, so if you're talking about changing our national flag, surely you should have a flag designer or other design experts involved."
Tauranga MP Simon Bridges said in spite of the criticism, the independent Flag Consideration Panel conducted a robust and thorough public consultation process. A spokesperson from deputy Prime Minister Bill English's office said the cost of conducting referendums was the cost of ensuring that every citizen got to have their say.
Sir Michael Cullen says he supports a flag change and his choice is the Red Peak design because it represents many of the features New Zealanders identify with. Photo / NZME.
Red Peak perfect symbol of Aotearoa - Sir Michael
Former deputy prime minister Sir Michael Cullen has long been a supporter of New Zealand changing its flag, despite him being a British-born Kiwi.
"I don't think it is possible to come up with as brilliant a design as Canada did, but it's really important that we choose something which we can identify with as New Zealanders, and also eliminates any confusion with the Australian flag," he said.
Sir Michael, who is based in the Bay of Plenty, said he was in favour of the Red Peak design because it was distinctive but not "overly garish".
"I have always been in favour of red on the bottom of a new flag, which represents the ring of fire in which New Zealand is situated. Then white in the middle to represent Aotearoa, "The Land of the Long White Cloud" and black or blue on the top which represented the sky. That's New Zealand."
Sir Michael said the flag change process could have been handled better. "It could have been less clumsy and done a lot more efficiently and been less costly."
Sir Michael suggested the politicians could have held focus group interviews with a team of designers and other experts, followed by public opinion polls that would have been far more representative than the opinions of those who attended the 25 public meetings.
It could have also eliminated the need for a second referendum, he said.
"I think the $26million cost has soured a lot of people's views which is unfortunate, but holding a binding referendum does still give people the chance to participate in the process if they want to."
In 2015 and early 2016, New Zealanders will consider options for our flag's future. The first postal referendum takes place between November 20-December 11. People get to vote on the five proposed alternative designs.
Q2. What if I don't want the flag to change? You get that choice in the second binding referendum in March to choose between the current flag and the preferred alternative from the first referendum.
Q3. Why don't we just do one referendum? A dual referendum process was considered to be more likely to lead to a legitimate and enduring result.
Q4. Who can vote in the referendums? People who are enrolled prior to the start of the voting period will be able to vote in the postal referendums.
