Nau Mai, Haere Mai, Welcome. The Republican Movement is a network of New Zealanders who want a New Zealand republic with our head of state elected by New Zealanders. We are a non-partisan group, with members drawn from all walks of life, and all sides of the political spectrum.

We are committed to:

  • involving all New Zealanders in the republic debate;
  • providing relevant and reliable information;
  • focusing on ideas, not personalities; and
  • winning a referendum to establish the republic.

Creating a republic does not require any change to the Treaty of Waitangi, New Zealand's flag or Commonwealth membership.

Supporters of a republic

What supporters of a New Zealand republic say:

  • Geoff Head, consultant

    New Zealand is a vibrant multi-cultural Pacific nation. It makes no sense for us to be ruled (not even symbolically) by whoever happens to be the head of the royal family of England, and especially not King Charles! Come on Kiwis, time to break free!

Recent updates



Events, newsletters, blog posts and images from the Republican Movement.

NZ moving away from monarchy - Cullen

Dr Cullen appeared on TVNZ's breakfast this morning to discuss his new position on a New Zealand republic:

Live stream of Reconstituting the Constitution

There's a live stream of the Reconstituting the Constitution. Dean Knight is currently speaking.

Back Benches with Dave Guerin

Dave Guerin appeared on TVNZ's Back Benches last night to put the case for a New Zealand republic. Dave did a stirling job representing the Republican Movement - good onya!

August 2010

Read in this month's edition:

  • The Queen is dead. Long live the republic?
  • Constitution conference: Dr Cullen converts to republicanism… gradually
  • Prince Charles is strange claims NZ politician
  • Honours system under media scrutiny on Radio NZ
  • Keys to spend weekend with Queen
  • How much for a 21 Gun salute?
  • Republican campaign expanding in Sweden
  • My fellow youth parliamentarians...
  • Opinion: The Referendum Referendum

Breakfast TV on Cullen's speech

TVNZ's Breakfast program featured Dr Cullen's comments today. Simon O'Connor of Monarchy New Zealand and myself went on and discussed the speech with Pippa Wetzell.

Australia: 63% for republic, 31% against

The Age reports a new poll showing 48% of Australians oppose a republic "at this time" with 44% in favour.

Monarchists: New Zealand republic would be like Lebanon, the US

a street in Beirut during the Lebanese civil war. Monarchy New Zealand thinks this is what a New Zealand republic will be like
A street in Beirut during the Lebanese civil war. Monarchy New Zealand thinks this is what a New Zealand republic will be like

The Herald on Sunday feature article (not online) on the future of the monarchy has revealed some interesting sentiments from Monarchy New Zealand's Simon O'Connor:

"In terms of Julia Gillard I think it's quite disappointing, she is stuck in a 20th-century mindset. Republicanism is an outdated idea."

This is a nice piece of spin, but the reality is that Mr O'Connor is defending an 18th century institution in the form of the constitutional monarchy. The fact the British monarchy lost its appeal during the 20th century doesn't make republicanism "outdated" by any stretch of the imagination. The fact is Gillard was repeating a long-standing ALP policy for plebiscites on a republic.

However, the really interesting bit is an unquoted statement wherein Simon "cites violence in Lebanon and the contentious 2000 US elections of examples of where republics have faltered." If this is verbatim what Mr O'Connor said, it's simply staggering. There is no analogy between New Zealand, the United States and Lebanon. For starters, Lebanon's civil war was created by deep seated religious divisions, not by republicanism. Secondly, assuming Lebanon was like New Zealand with the Queen as its head of state, that would hardly have helped since the Queen is head of an established church and reigns "by Grace of God".

The US example is laughable - that was an argument over a closely fought election that was decided in the US Supreme Court, hardly any different from parliamentary disputes over legitimacy. There have been two elections since that have gone without a hitch. I suspect, like the comparison with the United States, that Mr O'Connor isn't serious or is being deliberately deceptive.

Syndicate content