Air NZ’s Luxon on the flag

February 1st, 2016 at 4:00 pm by David Farrar

The Herald reports:

Luxon spent 16 years living overseas and several years in Canada during the Canadian flag referendum.

In 1965 when they changed their flag, there was a lot of the same debate that was now happening in New Zealand.

“One of the things was, is the maple leaf and in our case, the silver fern, an overused logo or emblem. The reality is it has become a singular identifier of Canada and all Canadians and I think in many ways the silver fern will work like that for us here as well.”

Luxon said Canada’s transition was quite messy but that was the nature of such debates.

Countries like Canada with its maple leaf and Japan with its rising sun were easily identified by their iconic flags and Luxon said the fern was on par with those global icons.

“We’re in a world of 196 countries, 7.3 billion people. As a person who has spent 16 years living overseas and leads a company that does a lot of export business, I just think it helps us stand out a little bit better,” he said.

I doubt 1% of the world could recognise the NZ flag as representing New Zealand. However I’d say the maple leaf flag and rising sun flags have massive recognition globally as the flags of Canada and Japan. We have a chance to have our national symbol of the silver fern fly on our flag around the world. Or we can stick with a flag that like 30 others has a union jack on it.

Herald calls for fern flag to fly on bridge

January 11th, 2016 at 1:00 pm by David Farrar

The Herald editorial:

This is a serious and urgent request of whomever is running the Government in the Prime Minister’s absence. Please fly the proposed new flag from the Auckland Harbour Bridge, either on one pole alongside the existing flag, or on both poles.

We will be voting on them in just two months and it is vital to see the proposed alternative in action before we can decide.

Until we see how it looks fluttering in a breeze, lying limp and performing in various conditions, we cannot know whether its design really “works”.

I agree. Both the current flag and the alternative one offer should fly. Having New Zealanders seeing them on flagpoles will better allow for an informed vote.

Guest Post: Flag Referendum

January 10th, 2016 at 10:00 am by David Farrar

A guest post by Anthony Morris:

The result of the first flag referendum was very close, with the country being split down the middle on whether we prefer the red and blue silver fern design or the black and blue sliver fern, The red and blue flag was a clear favourite on first preferences with 580,241 votes to 559,587 for the black and blue. The black and blue design only pulled ahead after the second preferences of the voters for two lowest ranking flags were added. The final tally, also adding in the second preferences of the red peak voters, was 670,790 for the black and blue design to 655,466 for the red and blue – only 2.3% behind.  

Given the result was so close I think it is time to pause the legislative process and allow for further consultation to tweak the final design. Surely we need more of a consensus on the preferred new flag before having a final vote? 

Design wise, I think a large area of black only works on a pure black and white flag. I can understand the desire to see the silver fern partly as we are used to seeing it on a black and white flag, but the black and blue design is not inspiring and the blue also looks too pale. Perhaps we can come up with a compromise? I have tried with the design below which takes the darker blue of the red and blue design and adds in a red contour to reduce the expanse of black. The contour could represent many things.

black fern mod

For my 2c I disagree. We’ve had a referendum and one design won. Merging the 1st and 2nd designs means a new design no one voted for.

Soper backs flag change

December 20th, 2015 at 12:00 pm by David Farrar

Barry Soper writes:

After the counting of almost 1.6 million votes, or just on 49 per cent of the eligible voters, the Kyle Lockwood, black, white and blue design’s been chosen. In my book it’s the right one of the two that in reality stood a bolter’s show of making the final cut.

The black over the red is sensible. Black is the colour New Zealand’s known for on the international sporting stage, from the All Blacks, to the Black Ferns to the Black Caps to name just a few of the standouts. Red on the other hand denotes the blood we’ve spilt at home and in foreign theatres of war, most of it needlessly.

To say that changing our flag is in some way disrespectful to those who fought in foreign climes is bollocks.

Having travelled to every battlefield we’ve fought on around the world, some of them with our old diggers, the story almost to a man was they went away to fight for a sense of adventure. The flag, King and country never came into it.

The thousands of those who didn’t make it back home lie in graves marked, not by the New Zealand flag, but by a silver fern.

The silver fern is the global symbol for New Zealand, and I’d love to see it on our flag.

Let’s now hope this is the first leg of the trifecta. We’ve chosen the right flag to go up against the current one, let’s now take this one in a lifetime opportunity to show we’re a country with our own identity and ditch the Union Jack.

I love our history and heritage with the UK, but I think having their flag on ours makes us look like a colony, not an independent country.

One can only hope that Labour can now finally move on from its feeble opposition to the money spent and the way the referendum was conducted and climb on board it’s own policy of getting rid of the current flag by referendum.

No chance sadly.

We have a winner

December 11th, 2015 at 8:49 pm by David Farrar

Silver_Fern_Black_White_and_Blue

By an incredibly narrow margin the black, white and blue silver fern has beaten out the red, white and blue design.

Turnout was 48.2% and of the 1,527,042 votes received there were 148,022 informals.

The first round of counting saw:

  1. Red, white, blue fern 41.7%
  2. Black, white, blue fern 40.2%
  3. Red Peak 8.7%
  4. Black & white fern 5.7%
  5. Koru 3.8%

The second round of counting saw:

  1. Red, white, blue fern 42.4%
  2. Black, white, blue fern 40.9%
  3. Red Peak 9.7%
  4. Black & white fern 7.1%

The third round of counting saw:

  1. Black, white, blue fern 44.8%
  2. Red, white, blue fern 44.4%
  3. Red Peak 10.8%

The final round of counting saw

  1. Black, white, blue fern 50.5%
  2. Red, white, blue fern 49.5%

Overwhelming support for the two Kyle Lockwood designs. You can see why they were both included.

The winning flag  is now the distinct underdogs under the current design, but New Zealanders now have a binary choice and three months to debate and decide.

Hosking endorses e-voting

December 11th, 2015 at 2:00 pm by David Farrar

Mike Hosking writes:

I hope you’ve voted.

The first of the flag polls closes tomorrow.

I note there’s a bit of scuttlebutt about, suggesting if the turnover isn’t that high, then the pressure will go on the Prime Minister to call off the second vote in March.

I will countenance no such nonsense.

I think the turnout will be low. Why wouldn’t it be?

Getting people to drag mail in from the box, open envelopes, read instructions, sign forms and stick them back in envelopes and go find a post box is from 1992 if not earlier.

All voting should be electronic, at your leisure via phone, tablet or computer.

Your vote should be a click.

A referendum such as this would be ideal for e-voting. I submitted that it should be an option.

As Hosking says, amazing so many people can bother to find a post box today.

The only winner out of all this paperwork is New Zealand Post which is probably very grateful given the state of its company. It’s one of the ironies of the vote: people who complained about the cost mostly didn’t realise it’s virtually all stamps.

Actually changing the flag, if we do, will cost a couple of million bucks. The meetings they held, the advertising and so on is actually pocket change compared with the post bill which is about $17 million of the $26 million budget.

And arguably the net cost to the taxpayer is only $9 million as the $17 million post bill is extra revenue for NZ Post.

So to the flag itself.

I’ve voted for the Blue and Black, the black is us, it’s got the stars and the fern, it’s perfect.

If not that, I’d take the blue and red.

If perchance any of the other three pop up – which they won’t, but if they do – I’ll be sticking with the status quo.

I have never wanted change for change’s sake, I’ve wanted change because we have a once-in-a-lifetime chance to make a statement about who we are and where we’re going.

I did red and blue first.

After tomorrow we’ll have the contender, the new flag on the block.

The beauty of that is that for the first time, we have choice, proper choice, win and lose choice.

Ranking options is choice, but nothing fundamentally changes. Once we have the two go head to head that’s when it really starts to count.

That’s when we’re going to see people really get engaged, because it actually matters.

Yep the real debate and choice starts next week. For the first time in our history people in March will get to decide what should be our national flag.

What will turnout be?

December 11th, 2015 at 11:00 am by David Farrar

thurs_10_12_stats

Despite one less week of voting, turnout is well up on the 2013 asset sales referendum, both in gross terms, and as a percentage of the population. Votes received today yet to be counted.

So turnout so far is 47.4% and might hit 48%. How does that compare with other stand alone referenda. In order the turnout rates have been:

  1. 1995 Firefighters 27.0%
  2. 2013 Asset Sales 45.1%
  3. 2015 Flag 47.4% (with one day to go)
  4. 1992 Electoral System 55.2%
  5. 2009 Smacking 56.1%
  6. 1997 Compulsory Superannuation 80.3%

So the flag referendum is ahead of both the union initated referenda.

Now there is a difference between binding and indicative, but this is only semi-binding in that it is choosing an option, not a final decision. The best comparison is to the 1992 vote to choose an electoral system.

That vote got 55% turnout and the flag referendum looks to be around 48%. Now considering how massively more important the electoral system is than the flag, that’s not a massive gap.

Shipley backs the fern

December 1st, 2015 at 11:00 am by David Farrar

Stuff reports:

New Zealanders must rise up and be proud of who they are – and that involves letting go of the “colonial” flag and choosing a new identity.

Former Prime Minister Jenny Shipley, who led the National government between 1997 and 1999, has revealed she supported changing the flag to a silver fern during her time in office.

Shipley has made a point of avoiding commenting on politics, since retiring from Parliament. But now, with voting papers out to rank the five options in the running if voters chose to dump the current flag next year, she has gone public on why she believes Kiwis need a change.  …

While our history is colonisation, I’m horrified to think that people would allow a colonial symbol to be part of the shadow that flies over us.”

Shipley said her support was nothing to do with backing her successor as National Party leader and prime minister, John Key.

The Kyle Lockwood  silver fern (red, white and blue) is her pick, with the black, white and blue fern in second place. She said ferns represented new life unfolding and red had chiefly heritage in Maori and Pakeha cultures.

During her time as Prime Minister, she said, Ministry of Foreign Affairs officials asked her to wear a fern brooch.

“They said ‘you’re on TV more than anything else, actually more than the flag when you travel abroad so we would really like you to wear a fern because it’s the most recognised symbol worldwide of New Zealand. People go: New Zealand … fern’. And they produced three beautiful broaches, one of which I continue to wear today.”

Despite her support for removing the Union Jack from the flag, Shipley remains a monarchist, saying the English king or queen serves as an extremely efficient titular head.

But that hasn’t stopped her from wanting to fly a silver fern from the flagpole in her Auckland garden.

“My husband Burton has been walking this new flagpole around the garden trying to decide where it’s going to be put. I have a magnificent woollen current New Zealand flag, but I will be sorely tempted to put one of the change ones up. I’d prefer to.”

“I’ve had the privilege of being Prime Minister and I’ve walked into many war graves and I [didn’t] see the existing flag in any of them.”

I may be wrong but I suspect every living former Prime Minister supports a change. Not entirely sure for Geoffrey Palmer though.

Voting starts today

November 20th, 2015 at 9:00 am by David Farrar

Voting starts today. For those interested here is how I will be voting in the first referendum:

Silver-fern-red-white-and-blue

For the last two weeks I was preferring the black, blue and white fern, as black is our de facto national colour. But it was seeing the flags all flying outside the Westpac stadium that swung me back towards this one. The black looks better on a screen, but the red better in real life – and stands out more on darker days.

Silver-fern-black-white-and-blue

My very close second choice.

Red-peak-primary

Red Peak has grown on me, and if it wins the first referendum I’d vote for it over the current flag.

Black-and-white-fern-primary-v2

Doesn’t do a lot for me. A pity the simple silver fern on black design was not chosen. I understand the concern ISIS has a black flag also, but I still love the simplicity of it. This design though just doesn’t quite work for me. If it won, would probably vote for the current flag to remain.

Koru-black-primary

Sorry Koru. Someone has to be 5th.

Is Red Peak racist?

November 16th, 2015 at 4:00 pm by David Farrar

Rodney Hide quotes Tu Harawira:

My first preference is to stick with our present flag. My second choice was “Red Peak” – but not any more.

I didn’t know why Red Peak appealed. It just did. But thanks to Maori broadcaster Tu Harawira I now know it’s because it’s a racist flag appealing to my inner colonialist. Red Peak now disgusts me.

It came as a jolt when Harawira this week told the 24-hour Flag Summit that Red Peak symbolises “white deciding where the colours will go”.

“To me this is a symbol of the white fellas with all the colours in the corner.”

It’s true. The big white stripe has marginalised blue, red and black shapes forcing them to the margins. Who knew that Red Peak was really a racist flag! :-)

RSA divisions

October 28th, 2015 at 11:00 am by David Farrar

Stuff reports:

The flag debate is driving a wedge within the RSA.

The organisation has so far been a staunch campaigner for keeping the current New Zealand flag – but now some members think it’s gone too far.

The RSA has made submissions to the select committee, started a campaign called ‘Fight for our Flag’ and, after the alternate flag choices were revealed, encouraged members to boycott the first referendum by writing ‘we support the current flag’ on the ballot.

Now an uprising within the troops are calling for the RSA to abandon the campaign, which has already been allotted $20,000 of its budget.

Devonport RSA president Chris Mullane sent a letter to the National RSA last Thursday, articulating its members’ concerns about the campaign, telling them it “smacks of sour grapes” and demanding it be abandoned at the National RSA’s meeting next week.

Almost all of Devonport RSA’s 180 members had voted against the campaign at their latest meeting, he said.

Mullane said it wasn’t about him trying to force a flag change, although he would vote for a change.

He said the reason the members were upset was the the RSA was encouraging people to “play around with the democratic process”.

This is where the RSA has gone wrong. No one begrudges them campaigning for the status quo on the second referendum. But actively campaigning for people to spoil their ballots at the first referendum is not something that sits well with many of their members.

NZ Flag survey results

October 13th, 2015 at 1:00 pm by David Farrar

Got over 2,500 responses in just over half a day to the online survey on flag preferences. This is the first survey that I have seen that asked people to rank all six options for the NZ flag in order. The aim was to understand preferences better,

It is not a scientific poll as it was self-selecting from people who read my blog, or follow me on Facebook or Twitter (plus their circles).

Anyway what were the results of the first preferences:

  1. Union Jack & Southern Cross 26.3%
  2. Silver Fern (Black, White & Blue) 25.8%
  3. Red Peak 24.0%
  4. Silver Fern (Red, White & Blue) 18.4%
  5. Silver Fern (Black & White) 3.8%
  6. Koru 1.6%

So the current design is the most popular.

What happens when we drop off the least preferred design.

  1. Union Jack & Southern Cross 26.6%
  2. Silver Fern (Black, White & Blue) 26.0%
  3. Red Peak 24.8%
  4. Silver Fern (Red, White & Blue) 18.6%
  5. Silver Fern (Black & White) 4.0%

Then you drop of the black and white fern:

  1. Silver Fern (Black, White & Blue) 28.2%
  2. Union Jack & Southern Cross 27.2%
  3. Red Peak 25.2%
  4. Silver Fern (Red, White & Blue) 19.4%

So now we are left with the four most popular options, all with significant support. What happens when the red, white and blue fern drops off?

  1. Silver Fern (Black, White & Blue) 42.4%
  2. Union Jack & Southern Cross 30.9%
  3. Red Peak 26.6%

No surprise most support from one the Kyle Lockwood designs goes to the other. The big question now is if Red Peak drops out, what do its supporters do?

  1. Silver Fern (Black, White & Blue) 53.7%
  2. Union Jack & Southern Cross 46.3%

Most Red Peak supporters actually ranked the current NZ Flag higher than the Black, White and Blue Silver Fern. The current flag picked up 15.4% and the fern 11.3%. But in this survey the fern flag would still win as it had a big buffer. Note again this is not predicting the referendum outcome.

So how would each of the five alternative flags go against the current NZ Flag? This is what they would each get in a one on one:

  1. Silver Fern (Red, White & Blue) 54.5%
  2. Silver Fern (Black, White & Blue) 53.7%
  3. Red Peak 41.5%
  4. Silver Fern (Black & White) 37.4%
  5. Koru 29.1%

So among those who did the survey, only the two Kyle Lockwood designs would win against the NZ flag. Of interest is the design with red does slightly better than the design with black, even though it has less primary support.

An excel file with the survey data is here – Flag Preferences – in case anyone wants to do further analysis on the preferences. Again this is not about predicting the outcome, but about understanding how the supporters of certain flags feel about the other flags.

Rank the six possible New Zealand flags

October 12th, 2015 at 3:30 pm by David Farrar

I’m doing an unscientific web survey to gauge people’s preferences when it comes to the six possible flag options New Zealand has.

The survey is at SurveyMonkey – https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/nzflagsurvey

You need to rank all six options.

Once concluded I will publish the results and also the preference flows from each option, so we can see people’s second and other choices.

Vote early but only vote once.

Will Red Peak make it?

September 23rd, 2015 at 12:40 pm by David Farrar

The Greens have announced:

The Green Party will today ask Parliament to allow it to introduce a Bill offering New Zealanders the choice of the popular Red Peak flag as a fifth option in the upcoming flag referendum.

Green Party MP Gareth Hughes will seek the leave of Parliament to introduce the New Zealand Flag Referendum Amendment Bill 2015 and put it at the top of the order paper. This requires the support of every MP in Parliament if it is to be successful.

It won’t be given leave, but the important part is down further:

“We won’t be supporting any changes other parties may put up to this Bill. We want to keep it simple and allow the opportunity for Red Peak to be included without re-litigating the whole referendum process.

The Greens are saying they will not back Labour’s demand to sabotage the process by having a yes/no vote before we even know the final alternative design.

“If the Bill is blocked today, we would call on the Government to adopt it as its own, to put politics aside and provide the choice that New Zealanders clearly want,” Mr Hughes said.

The bill would then have the support of National, Greens, Maori Party, ACT and (presumably) United Future. Is that enough to meet what the PM has said he wants – cross-party support?

If it then becomes a Government bill, Labour then has to decide whether to try and vote the red peak bill down, even after their amendments fail. They’d piss off a lot of red peak supporters if they do.

If the bill passes then the first referendum will have five flags, and people will get to rank them for 1 to 5.

UPDATE: The Herald reports:

The Red Peak flag will be added as a fifth option in the flag referendum, Prime Minister John Key has confirmed.

The Government has agreed to pick-up legislation that was put forward by the Green Party this afternoon, which means the Red Peak design will join the four flag alternatives already selected.

“The whole way through I have said my preference is to stick wwith the process that the officials gave us – accept the four [designs already selected].

“I said I was prepared to go outside of that but I just didn’t want people playing games. The Greens have been very, very straight – they have said, here is a straight bill.

“In the end, I’m not wanting to be the one that stands in the way of people having some choice.”

I’m looking forward to people campaigning for their preferred design.

Labour’s flag incompetence

September 16th, 2015 at 9:00 am by David Farrar

Labourflagballot (1)

This is Labour’s attempt to show they are a serious party. They included this in an actual bill to go before Parliament. Just two problems.

The minor one is they have used an incorrect description for the fourth flag. It is black, white and blue – not red, white and blue.

The major one is the referendum is meant to be preferential – you ranks the flags in order of preference. This is far fairer than First Past the Post. But in their haste they overlooked this and drew up a first pas the post ballot.

So two fails for them on this. How no one in Labour checks even bills for accuracy I don’t know.

And you know if they stopped playing politics and attacking National for implementing what was basically an identical policy to Labour’s, then the Red peak design could be included. All they have to do is back a bill which simply adds it on.

But they’d rather play politics.

Why we need to change the flag

September 13th, 2015 at 12:00 pm by David Farrar

flags

This photo from a newspaper, which I saw on Facebook, is a great example of why we should change the flag.

Idiotic Dom Post editorial

September 12th, 2015 at 3:00 pm by David Farrar

The Dom Post editorial:

Now we’re fighting about whether the Red Peak flag should join the final four for the referendum later this year. And it obviously should. The Flag Consideration Panel botched its job and ended up with three fern designs and a koru. What sort of choice is that?

The Red Peak movement has gathered 35,000 signatures on an online petition. That can’t be dismissed as just a digital bubble or a storm on a Facebook page.

Yes it can. It is exactly that. 1% of NZers have spent 15 seconds to sign an online petition.

A UMR poll of the 40 long listed designs found Red Peak 35th of 40. It was close to being the most disliked design of the 40, being in the top 4 for dislike or least preferred in every demographic.

John Key says the Government would have to change the law to allow a fifth finalist. So what? His administration will change the law at the drop of a hat if it really wants to.

So this pathetic, once great, newspaper is reduced to arguing that Parliament should pass a special law and over-ride the independent panel because a few thousand people spent 15 seconds signing an online petition. What a joke.

The Finlayson scale of nutiness

September 10th, 2015 at 9:00 am by David Farrar

Stuff reports:

Attorney-General Chris Finlayson has described as “nuts” a theory that removing the Union Jack from the New Zealand flag will give the Government more power.

Despite that, Finlayson said that “in the world in which I live” the theory was “quite moderate”.

“I have people alleging that – old grandmothers write in and say that the GCSB is spying on them, and that the Romans and Phoenicians were here before the Maori, so in terms of insanity it’s only moderately nuts.”

I would have called it barking mad, but I guess in comparison to some of the other stuff, it is only moderately nuts. I think we should ask the AG to provide his full scale, with examples, ranging from reasonably plausible to certifiable.

According to the theory, removing the Union Jack from the flag would remove the “due authority” of the Crown in government matters, as the Union Jack represents the monarchy.  “It also means we take away the very power which enforces both the 1990 Bill of Rights Act (the closest thing NZ has to an entrenched Constitution) and the founding plank upon which the Treaty of Waitangi has meaning,” reads one blog post.

Asked if removing the Union Jack from the flag would have any effect on New Zealand’s constitution, Finlayson replied: “Absolutely not. It would be a novel constitutional argument that the sovereignty of New Zealand was dependent on one corner of the New Zealand flag.”

How stupid do you have to be to actually think this?

Hehir on Red Peak

September 8th, 2015 at 9:00 am by David Farrar

Liam Hehir writes at Stuff:

We now have four official alternative designs for a national flag and, in a few months, a winner will be selected to go up against the Blue Ensign next year.

The selection of the final four has seen an intensifying of criticism of the coming referendums from liberal pundits. They do not like our current flag, which is not sufficiently politically correct for their tastes, but they object to the alternatives as well. This has seen a late rally behind the Red Peak design by Melbourne-based Aaron Dustin, which is now the official preference of the twittering classes.

This all comes a bit late in the game. Until now, the principal position of the liberal punditry has been to ridicule, rather than engage in, the flag debate. Toby Manhire, the Left-wing columnist who started the belated campaign forRed Flag, justified his former apathy for the consultation procedure on the basis that it made him feel “… infantilised, herded into a nationwide social studies project”.

This is a weird complaint, because many commentators have conducted themselves like ageing teenagers on the subject. They think the Blue Ensign is lame, but they also saw themselves as too cool and ironic to participate in anything so closely associated with John Key. They’ve therefore contented themselves with sardonic digs from the sidelines.

With the announcement of the shortlist, however, they seem to have suddenly realised that things are going ahead without them. They want another chance.

But it’s too late. Legislation could be passed to revise the shortlist in accordance with the tardily expressed preferences of Manhire and company. The question is why the rest of New Zealand should now trouble itself for the sake of people who until last week largely acted as if the whole process has been beneath them.

Red Peak is an okay design. I’d vote for it over the current flag, but I much much prefer the Kyle Lockwood designs. And so do New Zealanders according to the UMR poll. The Red Peak design barely featured.

If people wanted it, they should have tried to create a buzz for it prior to the short-list, not after it.

Red Peak is a case in point. While some elites consider it politically and aesthetically superior to the supposedly gauche official alternatives, a quantitative survey of the by UMR Research suggests that the shortlisted designs are broadly aligned with the public’s preferences.

By contrast, Red Peak was the preferred candidate of less than half of 1 per cent of respondents and just 1.5 per cent of those surveyed included it in their top four designs. In fact, of all the long-listed designs, Red Peak ranked among the least designs for all demographic groups surveyed – together with the similar looking Wā kāinga/Home. Notably, it was also the least favored flag of Māori.

In the UMR survey, Red Peak came 35th out of 40.  It was the third least preferred among men, 4th least preferred among women, 3rd least preferred among under 30s, and the least preferred among Maori. In every demograpic it is one of the least preferred designs, but because a a few people on Twitter sign a petition, the media make it a major story and demand the Government ignore its own rules, and over-ride the independent panel – to pick a design the public appear to hate.

It’s also 4th least preferred with National and Labour voters and overall least preferred with Green voters.

The flag conspiracy theories

September 3rd, 2015 at 10:00 am by David Farrar

Henry Cooke at Stuff reports:

THEORY ONE: THE FLAG HAS ALREADY BEEN DECIDED, JUST LOOK AT THIS TV SCREEN

This theory is probably the most fun. A Facebook photo – incontrovertibly from September of 2013 – shows Kyle Lockwood’s red and blue silver fern design on a TV at a Vietnamese hotel, set up for a photo with two New Zealand guests. There’s a clearer version here.

Even if it was Photoshopped, which it doesn’t at all look like it was, how on Earth did they upload it back in time? Seems like the decision was already been made back then, huh.

Does this prove that the whole democratic process is an illusion? Not quite.

A campaign for the silver fern flag has existed for many years, as has this specific design. Kyle Lockwood’s Facebook page for a redesign goes back to 2009.

It seems likely that the picture is not in fact Photoshopped or faked, but that instead, the hotel staff searched “New Zealand flag” in Google Images and found one they liked.

Heh, just like the time that an athelete from Kazakhstan won a medal at a sporting competition, and the national anthem they played was not the official one, but one they found on the Internet. It was from the movie Borat, and highly offensive!

THEORY TWO: REMOVING THE UNION JACK GIVES JOHN KEY UNPARALLELED POWER

This theory is a touch more hardcore than the photo one, as it requires a fair bit of reading to really understand.

It posits that removing the Union Jack from the flag removes the “due authority” of the Crown in government matters, as the Union Jack represents the monarchy.

Of course, theorist Ben Vidgen knows that most of us aren’t exactly royalists, and that royal assent is more a rubber stamp than a check on the executive, so he links the change to the power of the courts in ruling against the Government. Smart.

“A change of flag means not only that we have taken a major step to removing the DUE AUTHORITY of the crown. It also means we take away the very power which enforces both the 1990 Bill of Rights Act (the closest thing NZ has to an entrenched Constitution) and the founding plank upon which the Treaty of Waitangi has meaning.”

This one falls into the lunatic conspiracy theory space.

THEORY THREE: THIS IS ALL A SMOKESCREEN FOR THE TPPA

You’ll see this one in pretty much any comment section open on a Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement (TPPA) story.

While all this flag talk is going on, a trade deal which could drastically change New Zealand is being negotiated.

The details are secret yet we’re all sitting around discussing a symbol, laughing at laser kiwis and complaining about the $27m price tag. Seems a little convenient, hmm?

There is no doubt that the Government is happy to talk about almost anything that isn’t the TPPA.

No politician likes talking about secret international negotiations all that much.

But do you really think our politicians are competent enough to pull a proper smokescreen off? Did they intentionally stall TPPA talks, which were supposed to wrap up in 2012, then again in July this year, just to line up the timelines perfectly?

The TPP negotiations have been underway since Phil Goff started them in 2008. One could claim anything in the last seven years is a distraction from the TPP.

Also Bryce Edwards has had his own fun little conspiracy theory:

Bryce was just having fun, but it has led some to saying it must be some sort of conspiracy that I knew what the panel would decide.

I’ve been supporting a new flag since before John Key was even an MP. And over the years I’ve blogged quite a few alternative designs people have sent me.

The final four

September 1st, 2015 at 2:00 pm by David Farrar

Four-promo

The Flag Consideration Panel has announced the four designs that will be voted on in the first referendum. Their job is now mainly done, and time for New Zealanders to vote which ones they prefer, for the second referendum.

I like them all. I’m not sure what order I’ll rank them in. At the moment my order of preference would be No 2 (left to right), No 1, No 4 and No 3. But I my change my mind. No 3 is growing on me. However at the end of the day i think the silver fern is our national symbol, and has been for over 100 years. It’s what kiwis around the world use and regard as representing New Zealand, and I would like it on our flag. However as I said, I like all the design above.

The power of social media

August 16th, 2015 at 2:00 pm by David Farrar

John Key did a video on why he thinks we should change the flag, and rebutting some of the arguments against.

He didn’t do a media release. He didn’t do a speech on it. He merely stuck the video on his facebook page.

It’s had 489,000 direct views of the video, and 1.24 million people have seen the post as it has been shared by 6,206 people to their facebook followers.

That’s a bigger audience that either of the 6 pm TV news bulletins.

A great example of the power of social media. Not only have hundreds of thousands viewed it, but this is not a 30 second soundbite. Half a million people viewed a seven minute long video because they are interested in the issue.

Young lashes Labour/Greens for flag stance

August 15th, 2015 at 10:00 am by David Farrar

Audrey Young writes:

With the list of the final 40 just published, the debate has barely begun, apart from the objections by Opposition parties – two of which appear to be opposing the review for opposition’s sake.

Quite what Labour and the Greens will do when the debate gains momentum will present a conundrum for them. They cannot continue to attack the referendum process without indirectly attacking New Zealanders who are interested in it and want to be part of it.

They have ignored a basic principle in politics as in life: to thine own self be true, or the voters will see right through you.

It was understandable for the parties to rail against the Government asset sales programme last term – even though National won a mandate for it – because it was against Labour and Green policy.

But to rail against a review of the New Zealand flag – which National also promised at the last election – when it echoes your own party’s policy is simply dishonest and erodes trust in a party.

Labour campaigned on reviewing the flag. Andrew Little said he favoured a referendum. But purely because it is National doing it (which was an explicit promise in the manifesto), they are opposing the very thing they championed.

How can you trust a party that objects to its own policy?

You can’t.

The low turnout to public meetings on the flag was no surprise. There may even be a low turnout to the first postal referendum (November 20 to December 11) to choose the best alternative from four final flags.

But the interest in the referendum that really counts, the one from March 3 to 24, will be intense.

That is when the present flag will be put up against a single alternative.

I’ll bet the turnout for that vote will be as high as a general election.

Yep. Maybe not quite that high but I think it will be the highest a referendum has had, not concurrent with an election, in 15 years.

Labour also argues there should have been a referendum first to see whether voters wanted change before spending the money on the process.

But you wouldn’t expect to agree to a free house-paint without knowing what colour it was going to be.

And as the officials designing the process pointed out, “asking people to vote without seeing what these alternative designs look like would risk the legitimacy of the referendum process”.

It’s silly to have a vote, without knowing what you are voting on.

Labour leader Andrew Little this week said he would not vote in the referendum.

And, more absurdly, the party’s flag spokesman, Trevor Mallard, said that in November’s preferential vote he would rank the flag he thought was best the last and the flag he disliked the most the best.

That way, if everyone were as clever as Trevor, the present flag would be pitted against the most horrible one in March, the present flag would stay and John Key could be accused of having wasted time and money.

That is all it is about for Labour. They acre nothing about the opportunity we have to vote on what should be out national flag for the first time ever. They want to sabotage the process, as a way to attack Key. It is why they are unfit for office.

The final 40

August 11th, 2015 at 9:00 am by David Farrar

flagsnz

Above are the 40 long listed designs for an alternate NZ flag.

This will be reduced down to four for the first referendum, of which the winner will go into a binding referendum in which the public for the first time ever will get to decide on the design of our flag.

The ones that appeal to me at this stage are:

  • Silver Fern (Black with Red Stars) byKyle Lockwood
  • Koru Fin by Daniel Crayford and Leon Cayford
  • Silver Fern (Red,White & Blue) byKyle Lockwood
  • Black Jack by Mike Davison
  • Silver Fern (Black & White) by Kyle Lockwood
  • Manawa (Blue & Green) by Otis Frizzell

A flag submission by Penny Tucker

August 5th, 2015 at 9:00 am by David Farrar

Penny Tucker is a former diplomat and trade consultant. She has facebooked her submission on the NZ Flag, which I thought was very good so am quoting here.

Dear Flag Consideration Panel
I wanted to add my perspective to your process. I am a proud Kiwi who is passionate about New Zealand. I have the current New Zealand flag flying four feet from my bedroom window. I treat it with respect. I lower it to half-mast on instruction from Wellington. I am asked to take it down, fold it respectfully and put it away when my husband is out of the country. When it fades as a consequence of being battered by the extreme climate in Ottawa, I politely ask for a new one. So the current flag and I muddle along quite well. But I don’t believe this flag represents a modern, multicultural New Zealand.

I agree.

Recently, I have been saddened by the fact that what should be a spirited and productive discussion about New Zealand’s identity has become a partisan and petty political skirmish.

Yep, those who campaigned on changing the flag and said they support a referendum (you, Andrew Little) have now decided they’re against.

But I am not surprised because I am very familiar with what happened in Canada, exactly fifty years ago (we are celebrating the anniversary as we speak), when the flag here was changed. The process of getting the flag changed here was fraught. The removal of the Union Jack caused protests in the streets. The good people of Quebec were up for ditching the Union Jack but disagreed virulently about everything else. The lack of any blue border on the final design seemed to get the collective knickers of monarchists in a big twist and, in an oft quoted survey, many Canadians thought that the red maple leaf version was a rip-off from a biscuit packet and was too simple and “cartoonish.” The drawn out battle was divisive, bitter and, at times, physical. The process literally caused riots in the street. Yet I remain to be convinced that avoiding change to avoid controversy is a good innovative strategy for anyone. So what happened? The maple leaf is so Canadian it might as well start up a hockey team and say “eh” at the end of every sentence.

I doubt even 1% of Canadians think moving to the maple leaf flag was a bad move. It has become an iconic symbol of Canada.

I don’t have a particular affinity to, or dislike towards, the flag which flutters outside my bedroom window. But perhaps this in itself is a criticism: it is not an articulation of how I see New Zealand. It does however mean a lot to the many dog walkers who endlessly transverse our street and loudly and happily observe that the Australian Government has done a great job building such a modest yet modern t Official Residence for their Ambassador.

Heh.

Day after day after day. I am very keen to see the black and silver flag added to your short-list list. Side panels and a silver fern. To me this flag incorporates the colours of our national identity. The fern is the adult articulation of the koru. The design is simple and avoids being a smorgasbord of symbolism. Some argue that a flag is not a brand but in a globalised world into which kiwis are fully integrated, a bit of branding surely isn’t a bad thing? Our soldiers have worn and still wear the fern. Our representatives wear the fern. The fern is etched into the culture of our country. I doubt that a fern will look dated in due course because it has always marked a path along which Maori, Pakeha and a plethora of other more modern migrants have walked. We have a once in a generation opportunity. An opportunity to celebrate our coming of age. And I wish you all the best with your deliberations.

I broadly agree.  I’ve seen a number of designs I like, but what they all have in common is the fern. It is already our de facto national symbol, and I’d love to see it on our flag.