In this edition: National Identity An Election Year Issue; Monarchy Barrier To New Zealanders' Participation; Act of Settlement To Go?; The Way Forward by Barrie Cook; Spoken: Quotes in the republic debate; The Ancestry Visa Debate; Poll question: Should political parties spell out their national identity policies?

National Identity An Election Year Issue

The Pohutukawa in summer - part of New Zealand's national identity.

PETER DUNNE's UnitedFuture New Zealand is determined to make national identity an election year issue, with the party issuing a discussion document this month. The document suggests one option could be to adopt the Republican Movement's position that a referendum be held on the republic issue. In an interview with The Gisborne Herald, Mr Dunne suggested that a referendum could take place in 2012.

Mr Dunne's party is the first to set a clear vision for New Zealand's future. The Republican Movement remains non-partisan, however, although we welcome UnitedFuture's initiative on national identity. It is our hope that other parliamentary parties articulate their policies on national identity, and whether they support a referendum on a republic.

Monarchy Barrier To New Zealanders Participation

THE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION is standing up for the principle of participation with its proposal to "remove all barriers to New Zealanders' participation in government". The Commission is set to publish a 'Statement on Race Relations' including the principle, which states that no New Zealander should be barred from participating in the Government of New Zealand. This caught the Republican Movement's attention because this is not the case with the monarchy.

All New Zealanders, irrespective of their race, religion or gender, are excluded from being head of state of New Zealand - and excluded from choosing the head of state. When we held the monarchy up against the statement, we see the monarchy is a barrier to participation.

The Republican Movement has made a submission to the Human Rights Commission on the statement, noting this point. "It's time for New Zealand to move away from this colonial hangover and create a head of state of our own, who is able to represent our values and diverse, multicultural society" said Lewis Holden, chair of the Republican Movement.

For the Republican Movement's submission to the Human Rights Commission, click here (PDF).

Act of Settlement To Go?

THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT may just make Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond's day, and repeal the Act of Settlement 1701, according to The Telegraph. The Act of Settlement was the product of the Glorious revolution of 1688, when the Catholic King James II was overthrown by Parliament and replaced with the Protestant King William of Orange. The Act bars Catholics and anyone married to one from the British throne. As reported by Republic in June 2007, Salmond wants the law to go as part of his challenge to the British parliament to give Scotland more independence.

The last attempt to remove the Act from the statute books never got anywhere. It might this time, as the British Prime Minister is trying to kill two birds with one stone - the bigotry of the Act and the potential threat to the union of the United Kingdom.

For New Zealand, the repeal could potentially open up debate on the monarchy. The Telegraph notes that the British Government would have to negotiate with other Commonwealth realms before changing the Act. Which is why no-one wants to talk about the Act - the Statute of Westminster 1931, adopted by New Zealand in 1947 requires our Parliament's assent on any changes to the succession, along with 15 others. This has happened once, in 1936, as a result of the abdication crisis. Canada and the Irish Free State passed legislation approving the abdication, as neither Australia nor New Zealand had adopted the Statute at that time. Instead, New Zealand Prime Minister Michael Joseph Savage agreed by a telegraph sent via the Governor-General, who was also at that stage Britain's High Commissioner to New Zealand.

The requirement for assent is not legally binding on the United Kingdom, as it is only set out in the preamble - Britain could change the Act of Settlement 1701 without asking anyone for assent. If it did that, New Zealand would still have the Act of Settlement on its books, meaning that should Prince William marry a Catholic in a non-morganatic marriage, under New Zealand law he would not become King of New Zealand. That would make things interesting - we could potentially end up with a King Harry while the United Kingdom had King William. That situation would be divisive, forcing New Zealand to dove-tail to what the United Kingdom does.

The potential for repeal underlines the fact that the monarchy is an institution that compromises New Zealand's independence. Despite what monarchists might claim, we have little say over how the succession to the Crown is determined. This is why the Monarchist League of New Zealand are opposed to any attempt to debate the Act of Settlement. They know to debate the succession law means to debate the monarchy itself, which could lead to its abolition in New Zealand. Prime Minister Gordon Brown might just force that debate on them.

The Ancestry Visa Debate

British and New Zealand Passports.

She went to London to find work there, To claim her colonial birthright.
Cleaning hotel rooms in the mother country, While people trudged to work in the dim light

- The Front Lawn "Tomorrow Night", 1989

As Republic reported last month, the British Labour Party is introducing extensive new citizenship and immigration laws and may remove the ancestry visa option for Commonwealth citizens. This has provoked a quick reaction from the Labour-led Government here in New Zealand.

Whether or not the changes go ahead, the potential removal of the visa has already provoked heated debate over our links to Britain and the Commonwealth. As with any such discussion, whether we should become a republic has been a central issue.

At present New Zealanders can live in Britain on a student visa, under the reciprocal working holiday scheme or, if they qualify, through the ancestry visa. The ancestry visa allows any Commonwealth citizen with a British grandparent to work and live in the United Kingdom for up to five years without satisfying any other requirements.

Around 8,500 ancestry visa holders entered the United Kingdom in 2006 and of these, 1,940 were New Zealanders. According to The New Zealand Herald, the British High Commission receives around 4,000 applications for ancestry visas a year from New Zealanders. British citizens qualify for working holiday schemes in New Zealand, and can apply to live here based on their work skills. There is no equivalent in New Zealand to the British ancestry visa - Brits have no reciprocal right to work in New Zealand if one of their grandparents is a New Zealander.

The Home Office is undertaking the comprehensive review under the title "Pathways to Citizenship". The new scheme is a points-based system similar to one used in Australia. It is designed to ensure only those with work skills the United Kingdom needs can work in Britain. Working holiday visas will remain however these will not lead to a permanent work visa without an applicant first having satisfied the work skill requirements.

The last round of public consultation in Britain is now under way and one of the questions being asked is whether there is a place for the ancestry visa within the new system. Draft legislation will be announced by July or August and will be introduced into the House of Commons by November. The debate is set to continue over the next year and may continue through the various readings of the Bill all through 2009.

Helen Clark has announced she will argue in favour of retaining the visa for New Zealanders. The Press quoted the Prime Minister as stating "I think New Zealanders value the link with Britain and I think New Zealand has been a loyal friend of Britain's, and we'd like to see that reciprocated in the visa system".

The Republican Movement has made no public comment on the ancestry visa issue as yet. We will monitor events in Britain and the reaction here in New Zealand with interest. The public reaction to the changes is an intriguing insight into how New Zealanders feel about our links to Britain.

New Zealanders are now able to enjoy working holidays in over 27 countries including Norway, Chile and Thailand and there are plenty of European citizens who have more right to live and work in the UK than we do. This is the real driver of the change, not disloyalty to the Commonwealth, as suggested by British Labour MP Austin Mitchell. The Telegraph reports that Mitchell, a former academic and TV presenter in New Zealand, has tabled a motion in the House of Commons calling for the retention of the ancestry visa, stating its removal would be "an amazing betrayal of the Commonwealth". 55 of 788 MPs have signed the motion.