Many argue that the NZ flag gets lost in the sea of sameness. Photo / NZ Herald
Opinion
It's good to have a debate about the design but let's do it with care and caution, writes Sam Clements
Symbolically, little reflects more the character and nature of a nation and its people than its national flag. It articulates the core defining attributes of a given population, and often encapsulates elements that reflect the nature of a nation's landscape, heritage, and key historical events that have moulded and shaped
that nation's national identity in profound ways. At its best, it creates deep emotional and spiritual resonance in the hearts of citizens, and serves as a symbol of immense national pride.
Visually, it flies at countless international political gatherings, is flown proudly from public buildings, is displayed on a nation's exported products, features in innumerable marketing and branding exercises, is sewn into the uniforms of sportspeople and features on the exterior of a national airlines' planes. Perhaps most pertinently, it serves culturally to unite citizens in an intangible yet pervasive manner, reminding us of the national characteristics that bring us together, while similarly serving as a distraction away from the issues that periodically divide us.
Historically, few nations have chosen to replace their flags with new ones, although many have made adaptations to existing designs. Those that have replaced theirs have overwhelmingly been ones that have gained independence: most notably those that were part of the former Soviet Union, such as Armenia, Belarus, and Ukraine; when a new country has been formed following civil war, such as South Sudan; and when fundamental regime change has taken place, such as in post-apartheid South Africa. When a nation has elected to make adaptations to its flag, changes to flag elements have typically involved modifications to flag dimensions, or the addition or deletion of various symbols.
From a Commonwealth perspective, Canada stands out as a nation that chose a new flag as a means of asserting stronger cultural identity and a distinct symbolic break from its British colonialist past. Prime Minister John Key cites this Canadian action as a primary reason New Zealand ought to change its flag. This raises important socio-cultural, historical, and constitutional questions - ones that require careful, considered, and substantive national debate. This debate ought not to be turned into an election-year populist issue; indeed, it ought to be properly examined post-election, away from the petty political point-scoring and one-upmanship typically associated with New Zealand election campaigns of the social media era.
