Monarchy 'ineffective' in NZ

From Stuff, published on 5 March 2013:

Irrespective of how many like the monarchy, we need to move to an elected head of state.

It is obvious that some New Zealanders want the British royal family to provide us with a symbolic, hereditary head of state. They want Prince Charles to be our next head of state because he was the first to emerge from the last head of state and so carries on the religious and political tradition.

It is also obvious that just as many people want a New Zealander elected (either directly or indsirectly) to be our next head of state.

Given we cannot agree (and never will), the only option in a modern democracy is to have regular elections. It is not tenable to continue denying voters the opportunity to have their say and monarchy supporters can't expect to keep getting their own way just because they prefer it.

Supporters of an elected head of state argue that electing someone to the office will be more effective and more transparent. It will enhance our democracy and be a better symbol of the nation-state, over and above the government of the day.

At the moment the office of Governor-General is excluded from the Official Information Act. The office holder is treated as a de facto monarch with the Governor-General and their spouse treated as a quasi-royal couple. It would be far better to choose our head of state by either voting for one in regular elections, as in Ireland, or by letting our MPs elect one, the cheaper option. Either way we need an effective head of state who is empowered to act in our interests.

The monarchy is out of date and ineffective. Prince Charles is not a New Zealander amd cannot represent New Zealand. We need to move to an elected head of state before the Queen dies or becomes to frail to attend the handover ceremony. This latest bout of illness only reinforces the claim that it is time for change.

Savage - is the Vice-Chair of the Republican Movement.