NZ as a Republic?

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › NZ as a Republic?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | ... | 10

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12767

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#2971334 21-Sep-2022 21:52

We could stay with the same Parliament as we have now and have a Supreme Court to provide oversight and to settle constitutional disputes. The Supreme Court members appointed to a fixed term and selected by 70/30 vote of parliament.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Lias

5655 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3978

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2971335 21-Sep-2022 21:52

MikeB4:

The Crown are not separate entities.

But "The Crown" isn't the monarchy, "The Crown" is effectively the entire system of government with the British monarch merely a mostly decorative figurehead.

I'm a geek, a gamer, a dad, a Quic user, and an IT Professional. I have a full rack home lab, size 15 feet, an epic beard and Asperger's. I'm a bit of a Cypherpunk, who believes information wants to be free and the Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it. If you use my Quic signup you can also use the code R570394EKGIZ8 for free setup. Opinions are my own and not the views of my employer.

Lias

5655 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3978

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2971336 21-Sep-2022 21:57

eonsim:

If we ever go through the expensive of becoming a republic we should do it properly and get a way from the whole fake monarchy aka Presidential system that many countries use.

Let us have something more radical and interesting such as a three person head of state that balances treaty, public and government.

Stuff having a monarchy or a 'term limited monarch/president', lets have something modern and more representative!

I agree insomuch as that I think that the presidential republics are just a faux monarchy. If we were to move away from our current system, I'd love to see us look at something more like the direct democracy used by some cantons in Switzerland.. remove politicians entirely!

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12767

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#2971337 21-Sep-2022 21:58

Lias:

MikeB4:

The Crown are not separate entities.

But "The Crown" isn't the monarchy, "The Crown" is effectively the entire system of government with the British monarch merely a mostly decorative figurehead.

The Crown with regards to the foundation document that enables our nation refers to the entity of the monarch. The Crown in our government refers to parliament acting in government on behalf of the monarchy/crown

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

gzt

18685 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7826

Lifetime subscriber

#2971341 21-Sep-2022 22:10

MikeB4: The GGs role in the formation of government is purely ceremonial.

Not at all. Just our good luck so far makes it look that way. Fiji 1977 for example and to a lesser extent Australia 1975 are two cases where decisions were made.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12767

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#2971342 21-Sep-2022 22:13

gzt:
MikeB4: The GGs role in the formation of government is purely ceremonial.

Not at all. Just our good luck so far makes it look that way. Fiji 1977 for example and to a lesser extent Australia 1975 are two cases where decisions were made.

Our GG does not have the powers the GG had in Fiji and 1975 Australia.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

New World

Shop on-line at New World now for your groceries (affiliate link).

gzt

18685 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7826

Lifetime subscriber

#2971345 21-Sep-2022 22:23

tdgeek: In a Republic the Constitution makes that decision.

Nope. A person or body always adjudicates in one way or another for difficult cases.

Geektastic

18009 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8465

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2971349 21-Sep-2022 22:32

MikeB4: As a nation we need to discuss and debate this issue. It is not inconceivable that the UK could decide to abolish the monarchy. The remaining (from memory) 17 nations in the commonwealth still with the monarchy as head of state need to be prepared for that. It would be better if we made the decision as a nation before a decision is again forced upon us.

Personally I would say it is as inconceivable as almost anything can be.

Aside from a few leftist rabble rousers you would be hard pressed to find many supporters for abolishing the Monarchy.

gehenna

8667 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3883

Moderator

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2971354 21-Sep-2022 22:41

Lias:
freitasm:

So perhaps you should express your views more clearly, least people think your previous post was some racist bullshit.

I genuinely don't see how what I said could be taken as being racist. It has nothing to do with race, it's about the name of our country.

Such is the road racism travels. Saying something racist, that one doesn't think is racist, is still racist. Perception is reality. One should consider those situations an opportunity to do better next time. Especially in such a small country as ours.

gzt

18685 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7826

Lifetime subscriber

#2971358 21-Sep-2022 23:07

MikeB4:
gzt: Not at all. Just our good luck so far makes it look that way. Fiji 1977 for example and to a lesser extent Australia 1975 are two cases where decisions were made.
Our GG does not have the powers the GG had in Fiji and 1975 Australia.

Incorrect. The NZ governor general has exactly that power as the 1977 case. It is very rare this power is exercised. It exists for a good reason. It exists to allow a government to be formed in exceptional cases where the alternative is seen as a prolonged crisis. Mostly it's unnecessary.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19071 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16317

Lifetime subscriber

#2971360 21-Sep-2022 23:59

Just to chime in, I would vote to become a republic but I don't feel particularly oppressed by the monarchy. Mostly I just think it is a silly anachronism for a country like ours.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

Lenovo

Shop now for Lenovo laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

Handle9

11927 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9680

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2971371 22-Sep-2022 04:52

MikeB4: The Crown still exists as a signatory to the Treaty. The settlements to redress breaches of the treaty do not change that. If the Crown is removed then the treaty has no other party. Negotiations with the remaining party to the treaty will have to made or sovereignty reverts to pre treaty state.

If the crown becomes the republic and assumes all their rights, responsibilities and obligations whats the practical difference for anyone concerned?

There was no pre treaty “state” in the sense that it would be described today.

GV27

5977 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4212

#2971375 22-Sep-2022 06:47

tdgeek:

The Head of State would be the PM. She/he already is. The government of the day passes laws, they get signed by the Governor General as a matter of course. GG represents the Monarch. But the GG doesnt ponder over the law, its custom. So effectively the current Government is in control, so the PM is Head of Sate

Now, we could save money by having no GG salary and support costs, we can avoid the two for one Knightships that we seem to have. We can then discard the "Sirs" we have, they can end (if we became a Republic). Statute wise nothing changes. We can have out own awards, O of NZ instead of OBE.

Personally I like the link to the Empire. Over QE II's reign the empire became the Commonwealth as many went independent. NZ is independent. I feel its beneficial to retain links to the mothership

The GG doesn't ponder of the law but does retain the power to dismiss the government, which they have used in Australia. Putting absolute power in the hands of a PM without the oversight of a GG or upper legislature (not something NZ can really justify IMO). Also something I think is increasingly useful when you have governments who form after making rather expansive policies to the electorate, but then are impotent to implement or functionally govern the country, either due to incompetence or infighting.

My main objections are there are a bunch of difficult constitutional conversations NZ has to have one way or the other and to date we have shown extreme reluctance to be sensible or rational about them. I have precisely zero faith that the transition to a republic could be conducted with proper consultation, sensible debate and without official or political skullduggery.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18776 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12767

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#2971376 22-Sep-2022 06:58

Handle9:
MikeB4: The Crown still exists as a signatory to the Treaty. The settlements to redress breaches of the treaty do not change that. If the Crown is removed then the treaty has no other party. Negotiations with the remaining party to the treaty will have to made or sovereignty reverts to pre treaty state.

If the crown becomes the republic and assumes all their rights, responsibilities and obligations whats the practical difference for anyone concerned?

There was no pre treaty “state” in the sense that it would be described today.

Your last sentence is yet another racist trope . I guess you will say there were no North American or African states prior invasion.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2971377 22-Sep-2022 07:06

MikeB4:

We could stay with the same Parliament as we have now and have a Supreme Court to provide oversight and to settle constitutional disputes. The Supreme Court members appointed to a fixed term and selected by 70/30 vote of parliament.

That makes more sense than a previous posters seemingly good idea of a number of diverse people. The elected government provides a PM who is then head of State, based on a Constitution. The Constitution are the rules for NZ, and the Supreme Court can rule on that if required

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | ... | 10