Issues like the flag and MMP need to go beyond economic and opportunistic political cycles, writes Mike Moore.
Of my many failures none has disappointed me more than my failure over more than a decade to convince any politician or political party to champion the idea of a process to consider New Zealand's wider constitutional arrangements.
A proposal I wrote for our MPs about this under the title "Is it NZ's destiny to become just another two big Pacific islands" got few replies.
Every now and again an attention-seeking politician or a bored talkback host grabs a headline with yet another superficial idea to advance our journey towards nationhood.
Why not a new flag? The most pathetic argument based on an inferiority complex is that our flag looks like the Australian flag. Too bad, let them change theirs.
Next it will be "Let's change the name of our country." A serious politician said Aotearoa will put us at the top of the UN alphabet, ahead of Australia. Big deal, so what? What next? A new national anthem?
Australia will become a republic so it will be fashionable and in an expression of superficial independence we could follow them. This is the opposite of what a self-confident, self-determined New Zealand road to the future should be.
A bill will go before Parliament next year on becoming a republic. What sort of republic, what powers will our head of state have? An American or French presidency based on a popular vote or a mainly ceremonial presidency like Israel, Ireland or Germany where their parliaments elect the President?
Once it's decided to have an elected head of state, I suspect the people will want to make that decision and not leave it to Parliament.
These are not small issues. Conflict between the Parliament and a presidency need to be thought through. How many hands do we need on the steering wheel in Wellington? MMP already means the smallest coalition partner can grab the wheel occasionally to reward their special interests.
The strength of a monarchy and a Governor-General is not the powers they have but the powers they deny others.
And by the way when people throw around the words Tino Rangatiratanga, just think what that means. It's translated directly as absolute sovereignty, the power to make and enforce laws. Do we mean that when we so easily accept these slogans and flags?
I'm for change but I oppose a new flag and a referendum on the future of MMP because it's opportunist, random, simplistic and the process lacks depth, breadth and coherence. It's dangerous because change made in haste cannot be easily unmade.
We have abolished our rights of appeal to the Privy Council, established a semi-state government for Auckland, abolished then bought back our honours system and, abolished the position of QCs. Someone, not Parliament or you, decided we are officially a bicultural nation, not a multicultural society.
A flag that represents Maori sovereignty now flies with equal pride as the New Zealand flag which was enshrined in legislation. It will be on government buildings. Does that mean our embassies overseas?
We may have to pay a copyright commission every time we use this flag to a certain hapu - that will be a world first.
Watch how schools and local government buildings will be "encouraged" to use this flag, which is a party logo.
This is not new, party flags often become countries' flags, especially in the worst places in Asia and Africa. This appeasement is part of coalition politics, MMP and hopes to promote unity.
Does any of this make you feel more a New Zealander? These changes may be right but were you ever asked about any of this at an election or any other time and on what mandate are they working from?
It is important because there are consequences. In adolescent anger, we reject our parentage, European heritage and the gift of parliamentary democracy too easily and at great risk.
Our history and institutions reflect the lessons of the enlightenment - the Sermon on the Mount, the Magna Carta and Bill of Rights are our history too because no one came here without a memory and we were all boat people at one time.
The Treaty of Waitangi is central to the peace, progress and tranquillity of our nation. If we didn't have it we would have to invent it. But it's gone from being called a fraud to assuming biblical perfection in a lifetime.
Some realism is necessary. In 1840, Alaska was part of Russia, Germany and Italy did not exist as nation states. Slavery was not abolished in the United States for another 25 years.
All these issues need to be folded together in a process that goes beyond economic and opportunistic political cycles.
It should start with a leadership council of all the political leaders in Parliament who by consensus appoint an Eminent Persons Group who canvass these ideas and present them to constitutional convention, if so decided by Parliament.
On the agenda should also be our relationship with some Pacific Island nations.
Then the people must decide on their new constitution by a referendum.
* Mike Moore, who starts soon as New Zealand's ambassador in Washington, is a former Prime Minister and Director-General of the World Trade Organisation.
