A COLLEAGUE of mine raised an interesting point, in the twilight moments of the New Zealand flag referendum, as to whether there really was a mood or a mandate to effect a flag change.
I am anticipating that, come Thursday, around 8.30pm, the referendum will confirm the existing New Zealand flag will remain as the flag of choice against Kyle Lockwood's silver fern design. The only way the latter could succeed would be if those who want the Union Jack flag suddenly lose the ability to fill out their form.
A great many projects have taken place in this country, which have been done under the concept of "mandate". Governments have used it as a justification for policy, along the lines of: well, you knew what we were planning to do, and you voted us in, so that must mean you want it. In education, National Standards came precisely this way.
John Key might argue he had long signalled a flag change, and, when he was returned to power, he proceeded with it. But maybe, as a country, we're not good with being presented with options, based on a declared idea from the Government that a change is going to be a done deal. The package was: we're changing the flag, let's sort out the details.
It was interesting the Local Government Commission learned from failed amalgamation concepts by adopting their new pattern of asking the public whether they are, first, in a mood to change their local authority structure.
