05 February 2005
The yearly debate on one of this country's most revered institutions is under
way, writes the Waikato Times in an editorial. We are talking about the national
flag and whether it is time to ditch the Union Jack/Southern Cross combo in
favour of something more racy.
The debate could easily have been about the national anthem, which also comes in for regular scrutiny.
Defenders of the flag say altering it is cutting our ties with the past, unnecessarily breaking with tradition, saying goodbye to the Commonwealth.
It is no such thing. Our links to England and the empire are being looked at separately by a parliamentary select committee. Hopefully, when it reports back at some stage in the future, the general public will get to vote on any recommendations. Equally hopefully, people will think long and hard on whether there are any actual benefits in changing our most special of international relationships.
The flag, and anthem to some extent, are different beasts entirely. The flag is an inanimate object. Yes, it is something we need to have pride in, something for the world to identify us with, and something that should have a tradition surrounding it.
But being a slave to tradition, and passing up opportunities for positive change, is nothing but stupid.
Proponents of change, who last week launched a petition seeking a referendum on the issue, believe our flag is too similar to Australia's and is not distinctive enough. Defenders of the status quo were quick to ridicule rugby commentator Keith Quinn and other petition-backers on the similarity issue. Ours has four stars; the Australian six. Do the maths, they said.
Quite right too, but notwithstanding that they do look alike – and no one can defend the second point. Kiwis all know, give or take a star or two, what our flag looks like, but could you expect anyone else, anywhere else in the world, to identify our current model. Not a hope.
Think flags and two of the international ones that are unforgettable in history have been the hammer and sickle of the former USSR and the maple leaf of Canada. They work because they are unique and reflected something distinguishing about their country. A small country at the bottom of the world is never going to be recognised with our current design.
The problem may be in agreeing to an alternative. Some of the ideas floated would get us noticed – as the laughing stock of the world.
If it's going to happen, it needs to be iconic. That means the silver fern on black, a koru perhaps, or the kiwi itself as an outside shot. Things people from diverse cultures easily link to New Zealand.
Changing something as special as the flag should not be done lightly. But as the Canadians proved back in 1965 when, after years of debate, their House of Commons chose the maple leaf, it can be a huge benefit to the country. They now have one of the most easily recognisable symbols anywhere.
It is time for courage. The New Zealand flag should change.
The Waikato Times
© 2004 Fairfax New Zealand Limited