The farewell speech Anand Satyanand should've given

...the Governor-General's actual speech is here. But he could've ended his term with more than a bang if he gave this speech:

I begin by greeting everyone in the languages of the realm of New Zealand, in English, Māori, Cook Island Māori, Niuean, Tokelauan and New Zealand Sign Language.  Greetings, Kia Ora, Kia Orana, Fakalofa Lahi Atu, Taloha Ni and as it is the morning (Sign).

I acknowledge the Prime Minister John Key, the Cheif Justice Sian Elias, guests and of course my fellow New Zealanders.

This ceremony is a “state farewell” to myself as Governor-General of this great country. It is, perhaps unitentionally, a symbol of the office of Governor-General had the pleasure of holding for the last five years. I'll receive a 21 gun salute, state luncheon (which is not a type of reconstituted meat, I'm promised), Royal guard of honour and all the other finery that goes with it.

I get all this because prior to 1967, every Governor-General had been a non-citizen of New Zealand, usually a member of Britain’s aristocracy, and would be given a state farewell as they sailed off into the sunset; usually onboard a Royal Navy warship. This ceremony therefore underpins quite nicely the absurdity of the office in New Zealand’s constitutional framework. That's right, absurdity.
 
Since 1967, it has been New Zealand Prime Ministers who have had the sole right to advise the Queen who to appoint as Governor-General. That means, as we’ve seen in other Commonwealth countries, that the Prime Minister has the ability to sack the Governor-General – not that I ever thought of receiving such a call from Buckingham Palace.

Every Australian knows that the Governor-General also has the right to sack a Prime Minister. Theoretically only when they’ve lost the confidence of parliament, but as Australians also know this isn’t always the case. Speaking as a lawyer - and one who trained and practiced with the late David Lange - I have to say this certainly isn't a good constitutional check and balance. As a jurist, another role I held prior to becoming Governor-General, I can say on balance our constitution is certainly broken; in the sense that it doesn't provide for any proper check on the Prime Minister and Cabinet, other than elections every three years.
 
This simple fact negates any claim that the monarchy or the Governor-General has the ability to hold the Prime Minister or their Cabinet accountable at any stage. The Governor-General’s only recourse is to sack a Prime Minister before he or she sacks him. I have heard many of the persistent myths about the office of Governor-General. As Governor-General, I’ve been petitioned by many New Zealanders a number of times to refuse assent to a number of Acts of Parliament, such as the Electoral Finance Act, Section 59 Amendment Act and the Takutai Moana Act.

While I might theoretically have the ability to refuse Royal assent to a Bill, as Sir Geoffrey Palmer has pointed out if I were to do so I would've caused a constitutional crisis. It is politically unthinkable that an official appointed by an unelected head of state on the advice of the Prime Minister would overrule a democratically elected parliament. Deep down, everyone knows that if the unelected monarchy or myself as its representative were to get involved in our politics - to keep our politicians in check - they would undermine the monarchy. So I can safely say there will never be any intervention under the monarchy.
 
And yet, despite all of this, I have thoroughly enjoyed representing "the Crown" for the last six years. Actually, that isn’t true. What I’ve really enjoyed doing is representing New Zealanders. The office of Governor-General has, in the terminology of many academics, become a de facto head of state. My job undertaking the three c’s as I called them – ceremonial, community and constitutional functions – is actually fulfilling the role of a New Zealand head of state. I wasn't so much representing the Crown to New Zealanders, but New Zealand to New Zealanders, and because the Queen can't do it, New Zealand to the world. Not that I have something against the Queen. She's a wonderful women, and God knows has had to put up with a lot from her family over the years. But Her Majesty is not a New Zealander; she's never even been to New Zealand during the winter.
 
The passing of Sir Paul Reeves is a reminder of how far we've come. Sir Paul was the first Governor-General to officially represent New Zealand overseas, at the funeral of Emperor Hirohito in 1989. That's right - there was no senior figure to represent New Zealand, other than the Prime Minister, until just 21 years ago. Today, it would be unthinkable for there to be no representative of New Zealand at a major world event. The Governor-General has taken on a role that was, formally at least, meant to be only undertaken by the head of state. It wasn't until the start of my term as Governor-General, 2006, when the Letters Patent were amended so the Governor-General of New Zealand didn't have to ask permission of Buckingham Palace in London for to be able to leave the country. New Zealand is a country that has gained our independence and identity only by degrees.
 
In a number of ways I've worked to increase that sense of independence and identity. As Governor-General, I have begun a tradition of publishing a New Year's and Matariki message. I don't intend to compete with the Queen's Christmas message. I'm sure even if we severed links to the monarchy TVNZ would still broadcast the Queen. I do wonder if they'll continue to do so when it's Prince Charles in charge. Perhaps when that happens we will really get into discussing the head of state arrangements - although the Palace might hope for a short reign followed by Prince William as King.
 
Don’t get me wrong, the prince is an impressive young man and an excellent search and rescue pilot. But giving him a Kia Kaha shirt and a bottle of Steinlager over a BBQ doesn’t make him a New Zealander. It became clear to me attending the Royal Wedding earlier this year that the traditional monarchy has been subverted for a celebrity monarchy, where the flash of papparazzi bulbs blind us to their privilege. But back to the office of Governor-Genreal. Not many people know that my office costs the New Zealand taxpayer about $7 million a year. That's actually not so bad, but a fair whack above some of the claims I've seen.

And yet, as I've said, I've been proud to be New Zealand's Governor-General for the past five years. It is perhaps the fact that the office now receives little attention that it survives. Because, if we really think about it, it's pretty strange that an otherwise independent country doesn't have an independent head of state. In my own small way, I've tried to prompt that sense of independence. Looking to the future, it's hard to see the office I've occupied for the last five years lasting into the next 15. But that, as I've said in numerous interviews, is a matter for New Zealanders to decide...