A New Zealand republic more dream than inevitable

"Remember how quickly the flag referendum started to feel like a grim death march? The process of swapping the monarchy for something else would make that process look like a stroll in the park."

There was a bit of excitement last week as the result of a poll undertaken for ‘‘New Zealand Republic’’ showing enthusiasm for the monarchy was on the wane.

Now, it’s true the question asked was slightly inaccurate and somewhat strangely phrased. You also had to squint a bit to see how the result matched with the spin put on it. Nevertheless, it was a bit of a shock and was reported with some breathlessness.

On hearing the news, the first question that came into my mind was, ‘‘is the prophecy of the prime ministers coming true’’?

You see, I’ve noticed prime ministers often profess a belief in the inevitability of New Zealand becoming a republic. John Key did in 2008, Helen Clark did in 2002 and Jim Bolger did in 1994. David Lange once showed off his keen predictive instincts by proclaiming, ‘‘New Zealand will become a republic just as Britain will be blurred into Europe’’.

In other words, our leaders seem to talk about our becoming a republic in the same way I sometimes talk about repainting my house.

Now, I fully intend to do this… eventually. The problem is that as much as I like the idea of a repainted house, it’s very easy to put off for another day. That’s in no small part because painting a house is a real drag – you have to buy the paint, arrange the scaffolding, fill any cracks and holes, sand, apply undercoat and then actually paint the thing.

And that’s how a lot of people seem to view becoming a republic. Replacing the monarchy is a vague aspiration that would be nice to get around to one day. Perhaps after we’ve squared away the million and a half other things demanding our attention right now and we’ve had a bit of time to relax first.

If there is a difference, it is probably that I will get around to the repainting sooner or later. Besides the fact that it will look nicer once done, it will damage the house if I put it off forever. So in addition to the ‘‘pull’’ of aesthetic pleasantness, there’s also the ‘‘push’’ of the adverse results that will flow from neglecting essential home maintenance.

On the other hand, the pull factors for becoming a republic are weak and the push factors are more or less non-existent. Consider the reasons most commonly given for the need to become a republic. There’s the inferiority complex felt by some diplomats, law professors and journalists who wish we could be more like the cooler countries at the UN. There is that Catholics can’t be king or queen. There are the unexplained claims that having some bland bureaucrat for a president will somehow improve the economy. Then there are the expressions of pure befuddlement that a ‘‘progressive and modern’’ country like New Zealand still has a hereditary monarch.

No doubt some of these sentiments are earnestly felt. But are any of them worth the excruciating arguments over what, exactly, should replace the Crown, the proper process for deciding the question and just where the Treaty of Waitangi fits into it all? Just close your eyes and try to imagine the shrillness.

Remember how quickly the flag referendum started to feel like a grim death march? The process of swapping the monarchy for something else would make that process look like a stroll in the park.

And while I don’t really want to revisit that dark period in our history, it may be useful to think back to February 2014. That was the month a Fairfax poll was published showing fewer than 40% of New Zealanders supported retention of the blue ensign as our national flag.

At the time, one perceptive young writer predicted any attempt to change the flag would fail and warned against reading too much into these kinds of polls, noting, ‘‘[the] incumbent may not be much beloved, but it is the default option’’, and, in any actual vote, ‘‘[the] ballot will not ask voters to choose between the incumbent and an unspecified ‘‘something else’’ - it will have to feature a specific alternative’’.

Sadly, that sound advice was ignored, with the prime minister shortly after announcing his intention to hold a series of referendums on the question the following year.

The same logic holds here. It’s one thing to ask the abstract and sneakily worded question, ‘‘What is your preference for New Zealand’s next head of State?’’. It’s quite another to put the status quo up against an imperfect alternative in a real life vote on the matter.

It’s certainly possible that republicans could get their revolution one day, but is it inevitable? I don’t know — it seems pretty evitable to me.