Keep our flag – lest we forget

Written By: - Date published: 7:32 am, March 6th, 2016 - 155 comments
Categories: uncategorized - Tags: ,

‘

Lest We Forget

There’s a whole lot of talk
About changing of our flag.
They’ve already spent a ransom
On new fangled rags.
But there’s a thought out there
That she’s not done yet,
Let’s take time to remember,
Lest we forget.

 

 

 

She has flown over us
Since nineteen hundred and two,
And often she’s seen
A pretty grim view.
She was there at the Somme,
Passchendaele, Gallipoli,
Watching her people
dying to be free.

In tatters at times
Ragged and torn,
But still flying high
At the breaking of dawn.
She flew on the land
She flew on the sea
She flew anywhere
She was asked to be.

Sometimes the buggers
They blew her apart.
But that didn’t matter
She flew in our hearts.

Then the next damn war …
You’d think she’d had enough
But that old Southern Cross
Refused to give up
On those underneath her ….
Despairing …. alone..
She flew for their loved ones,
For their land and their homes.

Then finally an end.
D Day and such
She lay on the caskets
One final touch.

She flew from the pole
To the buglers call
She was there
When we tried to make sense of it all.
She was there through the sad times
Of that there’s no doubt
But that isn’t all this old flag is about.

Hillary, Rutherford, Jean Batten,
All top of their class
Billy T, Fred Dagg and now the Concords
When we need a laugh.

Kiri Te Kanawa, The Finns, Lorde….
We’re not known to brag
But they were all born
Under the Southern Cross flag.

Halberg, Snell, Yvette Williams and John Walker
Have all stood tall
As they saw her raised
Above one and all.

The All Blacks have always got the job done.
And guess who was there at every one?

Hadley…. Crowe …. McCullum as well
The never ending stories this flag gets to tell.

She may well be on her death bed
But she’s not quite done yet
She has still has those three words to say..

” Lest we forget “

By Anonymous.

155 comments on “Keep our flag – lest we forget ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. TeWhareWhero 1
    6 March 2016 at 8:42 am

    Sorry – but I feel about this the same way I do about pro-change people pointing to the silver fern on some NZ war graves and claiming the Lockwood flag honours the fallen.

    I posted this on the Change the Flag Facebook page – strangely has had no views or comments although a another post I made just before it has had several.

    “I’d like to see NZ become a republic and have a new national flag but I won’t vote for change now because : despite the fact that a large majority of Kiwis didn’t want to change the flag, Key went ahead with a back to front referendum which has cost $millions at a time when we are being told we have to accept austerity measures; and, there’s been NO information about how much it’ll cost to implement flag change – eg. changing everything which features the the coat of arms – such as the insignia on all police uniforms.

    2 of the 5 designs presented to us were virtually identical and more people opted for the red, white and blue Lockwood fern design as their first choice than the black blue and white one which won when secondf/third choices were counted. So – we are expected to vote for a new flag which designers are pretty unanimous in condemning as pretty awful – and which was the first choice of a very small minority of NZers.

    Reading this thread it seems people want a new flag because:
    a) the current one is too much like the Aussie one;
    b) we’re nothing to do with Britain any longer; and
    c) the fern represents us as a nation because our sports people wear it and it’s used by the armed services, i.e. it’s a well know Kiwi ‘brand’.

    Lots of countries have similar flags – check out those of Ireland and Italy.

    We’re currently – & John Key himself says this is unlikely to change in the foreseeable future – a unitary parliamentary constitutional monarchy, i.e. Queen Elizabeth II is the Queen of NZ and our head of state which means the Crown still has the power to dissolve our democratically elected parliament or refuse the Royal Assent of a passing a bill into law – so the Union Jack is still very apposite.

    The Lockwood flag isn’t just the fern. The red stars – and I confess I do like a red star – are lifted intact from the current flag. The blue element is meant to represent the Pacific Ocean and the colour has wobbled about between the fairly rich toned blue of stage one of the referendum to various more pallid shades including one that perfectly matched John Key’s National Party tie – and was also the colour of the flag they hoisted on the Auckland harbour bridge and have had to replace at considerable cost.

    The smaller black element is a nod to what became the national colour or, more accurately – the absence of colour. The black strip with small silver fern on the chest was first worn by the 1888 ‘New Zealand Natives’ rugby team; in 1893 the NZRFU adopted it as the national rugby team’s playing strip and black + silver fern has crept into all other sports and become increasingly omnipresent with the professionalisation and corporatisation of sport.

    And then there is that large, stylised fern – likened to a fish skeleton or a feather by detractors – and hardly an elegant thing in design terms, which is being defended / promoted because of its sporting and commercial associations and, on this thread, its links to fallen service men and women.

    There’s a great deal of money and emotion being poured into persuading people to vote for change and some very high profile Kiwis have thrown their considerable weight behind it – especially sports people and perish the thought that a Kiwi medal winner might be mistaken for an Australian at the Olympics. What’s that you say ? We have such radically different colour sports strips? Well, exactly. And if some numpty does run the wrong flag up the Olympic pole surely that says more about them than us. And besides the Aussies nicked our design so let them change. “

    • Kevin 1.1
      6 March 2016 at 9:02 am

      Hear, hear.

      In total agrement.

      I voted yesterday and voted for the incumbent. I don;t particularly like the New Zealand flag, but it is still better than John Key’s logo fern.

      I always find the military association with our flag a little strange to say the least.

      A fair number of my forebears fought in WW I and WW II and when Uncle Lew got hit in the elbow at Maleme Airfeild on Crete, I am pretty sure the flag was the last thing on his mind. He volunteered when war broke out as it was life’s big adventure. I cannot imagine him shouting ‘for King and Country’ as he hung out with his mates before leaving for basic, let alone doing it for ‘the flag’.

  2. Ad 2
    6 March 2016 at 8:54 am

    I voted for change.

    – consistent with being a Republican
    – NZ fully mature enough to change
    – not hard to separate from overall view of Government
    – well overdue and an important start
    – lefties are cutting off their nose to spite their faces
    – better than current one
    – sometimes necessary to separate process from objective

    Don’t have to agree, but those are my reasons.

    • b waghorn 2.1
      6 March 2016 at 9:07 am

      I voted for no change
      Red peak was far more flag like ( should have had the southern cross in the smallest triangle)
      I don’t like the black corner on the Lockwood flag
      I’m small minded enough to think fuck you key as I ticked the box next to the old one.
      I won’t loose a moments sleep if keys flag wins.

      • BM 2.1.1
        6 March 2016 at 9:11 am

        What a sad wee man, just couldn’t get past your KDS.

        • b waghorn 2.1.1.1
          6 March 2016 at 9:18 am

          Kds goes two ways , all those people who ignore all the shit things key has done or allowed to go on under his watch are suffering their own form of derangement.

          • Murray Simmonds 2.1.1.2.1
            6 March 2016 at 9:55 am

            Absolutely delightful; thanks for the post, pat.

            Can we give this man honorary NZ Citizenship?

            No .no I mean John OLIVER, not john key.

            • pat 2.1.1.2.1.1
              6 March 2016 at 10:01 am

              I for one would be happy to swap the two Johns…..and Key’s talents(?) are probably more suited to being a televised clown.

              • Murray Simmonds …
                6 March 2016 at 10:44 am

                Actually, I thought of nominating John Oliver for a QSM (for extraordinary services to the people of New Zealand, such as telling the truth) – or even nominating him for a knighthood, no less. So I had a look online at the nomination form.

                The reason for thinking it would be a good move to nominate him is that he (JO) would then be asked if he wishes to consent to his nomination – and that might be good for a public TV giggle too.

                Unfortunately, the nomination form requires two letters of support from people who know him well, and in addition requires a lot of personal info about the candidate including his address, DOB, etc, etc. (None of which I can easily find. There might also be a requirement that he is a NZ Citizen?)

                So I kinda gave up on the idea for the moment . . . .

                • pat …
                  6 March 2016 at 11:12 am

                  lol..well apparently we only have around 3 degrees of separation now so you may well find your two letters of support……I look forward to the day

        • cogito 2.1.1.3
          6 March 2016 at 9:33 am

          KDS… what’s does that stand for again…. Key’s Dick Shit was it?

          • UncookedSelachimorpha 2.1.1.3.1
            6 March 2016 at 12:08 pm

            Key Deceives Society
            Key Delivers Squalor
            Key Delights Suckers
            Key Dupes Simpletons

        • Reality 2.1.1.4
          6 March 2016 at 9:45 am

          If the PM was a more ethical person he might have had more success in persuading people to go along with him. But when he behaves like a teenager at a pop concert when he gets up close to the royals and brings back titles (no doubt thinking one will be conferred on him one day) – the word hypocrite comes to mind. And of course he wants to be able to hand them out to his mates.

          The proposed flag is gloomy and uninspiring.

        • North 2.1.1.5
          6 March 2016 at 9:56 am

          You on Auto-Troll this fine Sunday morning Bowel ?

        • AB 2.1.1.6
          6 March 2016 at 12:11 pm

          Yep – it’s all your ‘Key Devotion Syndrome’ BM
          Or maybe you have ‘Key Dysgeusia Syndrome’ – dysgeusia being a taste disorder and you do need bad taste to be so evidently devoted to Key.

        • Barfly 2.1.1.7
          6 March 2016 at 10:59 pm

          Are u truly that thick ??

          • Muttonbird 2.1.1.7.1
            6 March 2016 at 11:48 pm

            Yes, he is!

            Interesting that BM has not posted all day after the initial troll and warning. Either he has got a life (unlikely) or he has retreated according to National Party internet trolling policy.

      • cogito 2.1.2
        6 March 2016 at 9:24 am

        I voted for the current NZ flag and will keep on flying it whatever the outcome of the current sham.

        • BM 2.1.2.1
          6 March 2016 at 9:31 am

          You’re a pom, I’d be surprised if you didn’t.

          [Stop trolling. First and last warning. BLiP]

          • cogito 2.1.2.1.1
            6 March 2016 at 9:42 am

            So is Key.

          • weka 2.1.2.1.2
            6 March 2016 at 9:42 am

            You’re a troll, so why don’t you fuck off? Oh that’s right, because you are a troll. Seriously, you’re quite capable of commenting meaningfully but all you are doing in this thread is trying to wind people up.

            • risildowgtn 2.1.2.1.2.1
              6 March 2016 at 10:28 am

              just ignore the troll… pity u cudnt have a block the asshole button.. there ….problem is fixed

            • BM 2.1.2.1.3.1
              6 March 2016 at 10:34 am

              John Key was born in NZ.

              That makes him a New Zealander with a English Father and a Austrian Mother.

              If I moved to the UK, I’d be a New Zealander living in the UK, I wouldn’t consider myself even remotely English.

              The only way I would become English is if I gave up my New Zealand citizenship and that would never happen, so I’d always be a Kiwi living in the UK.

              Any children would be English, not New Zealand.

              • te reo putake …
                6 March 2016 at 11:04 am

                Weirdly, because his mother’s Jewish, some people think Key’s Jewish as well. And having a Brit dad actually does mean he can choose to be a Brit too, as I understand the Uk’s citizenship criteria. Mind you, if he ever pledged allegiance to another country, I imagine he’d do it under a star spangled banner.

              • cogito …
                6 March 2016 at 11:16 am

                Your reasoning is muddled, BM.

                Unless he has renounced it, Key is a British citizen even if born in NZ. My NZ-born kids are all British citizens and have British passports (as well as NZ)…. and I have just one UK parent and wasn’t even born in the UK! And my wife is third generation kiwi. However I would say that the same rules do not apply to those born in more recent times as I think that Mrs Thatcher tightened eligibility in the 1980s, so that foreign-born kids of British citizens can no longer automatically claim UK citizenship (or something similar).

                I would bet my bottom dollar that Key has used his UK citizenship to full personal advantage whenever it has suited him…. LOL…!

              • UncookedSelachimorpha …
                6 March 2016 at 12:13 pm

                Personally I don’t care about Key’s heritage. If he was a decent person and leader, I wouldn’t care where he was from.

                • cogito …
                  6 March 2016 at 12:33 pm

                  +100%

                  Let us hope for qualities of integrity and honesty from our future leaders and consign the incumbent to the “never again” section…. lest we forget.

          • Paul 2.1.2.1.4
            6 March 2016 at 10:25 am

            BM, Find a reasoned argument for changing the flag, not name calling please.

            • Magisterium 2.1.2.1.4.1
              7 March 2016 at 1:37 pm

              My great-great-grandmother and my great-great aunt were bayonetted to death at Orakau and buried in a mass grave by soldiers bearing the Union Jack.

              • McFlock …
                7 March 2016 at 1:44 pm

                And our soldiers today still swear allegience to the same monarchy behind that act.

                The current flag reminds us of that. It reminds us we need to change.

        • Ffloyd 2.1.2.2
          6 March 2016 at 9:58 am

          Ditto! Reply to cogito.

          • cogito 2.1.2.2.1
            6 March 2016 at 10:10 am

            Give me an honest process that unifies the country, and a good design that does justice to NZ, and I’ll vote for it. But not a sham of a process and an ugly design. That’s not being a pom, that’s wanting something good and meaningful. Until that happens, I will support the current flag, and all that it symbolises and stands for.

    • Halfcrown 2.2
      6 March 2016 at 9:48 am

      ” lefties are cutting off their nose to spite their faces”

      How and why? Please explain further, or is it just another line from Nationals book of myths the right love to quote.

      • Ad 2.2.1
        6 March 2016 at 11:03 am

        Most lefties are republicans. Few NZers are Royalist. Erasing the Royalist ensign – whatever one feels about the process or the personalities – would be the consistent policy position.

        It’s still Labour policy. Bizarrely.

        • Halfcrown 2.2.1.1
          6 March 2016 at 12:51 pm

          “Most lefties are republicans. Few NZers are Royalist. Erasing the Royalist ensign – whatever one feels about the process or the personalities – would be the consistent policy position.”

          You maybe right or wrong as I have no figures to support or deny your argument, and I cannot speak for other people. However a lot of my left and right thinking friends are against the criminal amount of money spent on this not needed flag shit which is only for Key’s ego. nothing else. It is also spectacular the number of right wingers I know who were avid royalist’s have suddenly become republications since Key wanted to change the flag, I think to myself, if they are a sample of the rights thinking, there could be a mass extinction of right wingers if Key said shit and they all tried to get on the shovel at the same time. A lot of them would get crushed in the rush.
          I go along with what a lot have said on here The flag change should be done when the constitution is changed not before. Not because of Keys ego. If Key was really serious about constitutional change why did he not have a larger debate about changing the whole constitution at the same time. But you dearly beloved leader wouldnt do that would he, as he would miss out on a knighthood wouldn’t he.

          I also have a have a principled position Ad like a lot of those on the left.
          I will be voting to keep the flag, until the constitution is changed.
          But that is not the only reason why I am voting against it. I am voting against it because there is NO principles in Keys pursuit of a flag change he is just ego tripping at our expense.

        • sabine 2.2.1.2
          6 March 2016 at 11:07 pm

          well there is the Dame Shipley who described herself as a royalist 🙂 she must be lefty then.

          Wikepedia has this.

          ………..Shipley unexpectedly backed Cultural Affairs Minister Marie Hasler’s call for a change in the New Zealand flag.

          Shipley, along with the New Zealand Tourism Board, backed the quasi-national emblem of the silver fern on a black background as a possible alternative flag, along the lines of the Canadian flag, but she took pains to publicly disassociate herself from Bolger’s support for republicanism. As the debate continued in 1999, the Princess Royal visited New Zealand, and Shipley stated, “I am an unashamed royal supporter, along with many New Zealanders.” However, the debate was muted by the controversy surrounding Tourism Board contracts going to the public-relations firm Saatchi & Saatchi, whose World CEO Kevin Roberts, also an advocate of the silver fern flag, was a good friend of Shipley. [4]

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jenny_Shipley

      • te reo putake 2.2.2
        6 March 2016 at 11:07 am

        Bloody RSA and their lefty agenda.

    • pat 2.3
      6 March 2016 at 9:55 am

      if lefties are cutting off their noses to spite their faces that would suggest you believe a sizeable majority of NZers seek a left wing agenda for governance….no?

      http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/298154/current-flag-the-favourite-poll

      http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11600218

      http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2016/03/04/nz-public-still-favours-current-flag-poll

      • Ad 2.3.1
        6 March 2016 at 10:56 am

        I’m quite comfortable being in the losing minority on this one.

        Because I have a principled position.

        • One Two 2.3.1.1
          6 March 2016 at 11:21 am

          The position you believe that you’re taking is misguided. It’s not principles that you have, its the delusion of principles

          Change at all or any cost is not principle. Its beligerance and foolhardy

          It is , The Self

          Just like the sponsors of this farce of a process!

    • Muttonbird 2.4
      6 March 2016 at 1:13 pm

      – not consistent with being a republican because this vote is nothing to do with republicanism. If you were a true republican you would show some patience and choose a flag alongside constitutional change.

      – NZ is not mature. Look at the poorly designed and initiated process.

      – John Key has fronted the campaign for change from start to finish and has let his desires be known from the outset even going so far as to wear the Lockwood on state occasions.

      – Overdue? There was no public desire for this whatsoever.

      – Lefties are known to have more appreciation of arts and design. Perhaps they just know what shit looks like?

      – Better than the current one? In whose opinion? How can you cover up one of the strongest examples of flag design in history with a stylised fern logo and call it an improvement? How can be an improvement when, literally, that is all the designer did?

      – The last point seems to be a rehash of an earlier point.

      I expected much more analysis from you, Ad.

      Am now disappointed.

      • Ad 2.4.1
        6 March 2016 at 1:54 pm

        – erases a monarchist symbol
        – ‘maturity’ judgement far greater than this process
        – didn’t find it difficult myself. Clearly not to others.
        – we’d got rid of the Lords, knighthood (until reinstated), QC’s (until reinstated), whittled the GG role to nothing, and as a whole have no allegiance to Britain. Overdue.
        – you can make it about taste if you like. It’s not to me.
        – the fern is a symbol of NZ
        – take it back away from flawed process: should the flag be changed? Yes, it’s the right thing to do. Does the process outweigh the objectivee? Not to me.

        • Muttonbird 2.4.1.1
          6 March 2016 at 2:04 pm

          – I don’t see a ‘monarchist symbol’ and I assure you I am to the left of you. I just see the flag of New Zealand.

          – the process indicated a paucity of maturity in spades. The need for change cannot outweigh the process by which change is offered.

          – You said it. They policy driven by Mr. Key is all over the place. Which is it? Allegiance or no allegiance?

          – Changers do not consider the importance of good design. It is secondary to them as it is for the prime minister. I’m for a strong flag. You appear to not be.

          – So is the thistle for Scotland, the Fleur-de-lis for France, the rose of England, and the shamrock for Ireland. Do any of those appear on their flag? No.

          – Same as above. A broken process results in a broken flag choice. We have a broken flag choice.

          • Ad 2.4.1.1.1
            6 March 2016 at 2:13 pm

            – The Union Jack is nothing but. The crosses of two British martyrs. The primary symbol of our colonial oppression.

            – I don’t hold that the process must never outweigh the desired policy outcome, as a political principle.

            – Key’s view on this makes no difference to me.

            – I don’t view myself a flag expert. I view the proposed flag as stronger against Australia, Britain, and anyone else who still has the Union Jack on it. That’s enough for me.

            – I’m confident enough that we can show symbols that are known across the world to be indigenous to us, and to let that represent us.

            – Everything is broken. And still good change is possible. Human nature.

            • Muttonbird 2.4.1.1.1.1
              6 March 2016 at 2:43 pm

              – Colonial oppression? I’m not sure what you mean by that. As I said, I see the flag of New Zealand as a whole. That is the flag I know.

              – This sounds like a dilution of democracy to me. The process was flawed as has been widely agreed. The Mr Key’s opinion was a major part of the FCP process and that has been proven by his facebook videos and his want of wearing the challenger at state functions which to me flies in the face of free un-marketed choice.

              – That’s big of you but what about other New Zealanders – the ones whose house prices continue to skyrocket under John Key’s immigration policies. They will vote what they are told to vote if it comes from the cult of celebrity prime minister we are unfortunate enough to have at the moment.

              – You think Lockwood’s fishbone ‘n’ stars is a better design that the union jack? There’s no hope for you then. I really weep at this.

              – You’re ignoring that other counties don’t do this and for good reason – it’s not a good flag design choice.

              – Weak, Ad. Why accept the result of a process which was broken because ‘everything is broken’? Why not make a stand against the broken process and say that it wasn’t good enough?

              • Ad …
                6 March 2016 at 2:51 pm

                – You seriously view the Union Jack symbol has no relation to colonialism? You’re one of a dying few in the world.

                – There hasn’t been too many double binding referenda in our entire existence. And they put Red Peak up, and it lost fair and square. Pretty exceptionally democratic to me.

                – I’m not voting this one on house prices. There’s a general election for that. Walk. Chew gum.

                – The Silver Fern is pretty comfortable wear. I’m easy. Come the Olympics, i think you’ll see the folly of your ways.

                – Most have, and so they should.

                – Because the result is worth it. The Asset Sale referendum was a whole bunch more flawed in process (It was never going to work), and i fought hard for that one. It was a matter of principle, not process.

                • sabine …
                  6 March 2016 at 3:10 pm

                  @ad

                  so only the flag has a relation to colonialism? Our constitutional monarchy not? The royal bludgers that came here on a NZ taxpayer funded holiday don’t have a relation to colonialism? Our PM munching sausage with the royal redhead is ok? the do nothing much brigade of NZ that is elevated to Dames and Kinghts? Nothing colonialist about that?

                  – many of us could not care about red peak and where correctly more then upset when it was added to the flag debacle selection circus at an extra cost, just to show that National can work with the Greens, or as a momentum for the Greens to show they can work with National. In hindsight, t’was nothing but a fucking blunder and it did not get much votes but cost extra money to add to the list of teatowels to choose from.

                  – house prices is for rich people, the rest will move to ditches, don’t you know that.

                  – the current flag has always looked good during olympics, and will equally look good during the Rio Olympics 🙂

                  – the asset referendum was a pefectly good referendum, everyone said No and no one in our current National led Government gave a shit. I actually would not be surprised if it would happen again.

                  As for the current National led Government and their mates, none of them have principles, they all have bank accounts that need to be filled. Pull’sher Bennefit, the double dipping blonde from dipton, are just two samples of how National Party ministers are bludgers, thiefs and bribers without a care and no respect for the office they hold and the country they supposedly run.

                  However, this is still a democracy, so you get to vote on your principles of what ever.

                  • Ad …
                    6 March 2016 at 3:18 pm

                    – I pointed above to many elements other than the flag that were linked to colonialism. Go back and check. Read, in fact.

                    – Whereas others in this site made quite a big deal about Red Flag. And lost, which is their democratic choice.

                    – The flag debate is not about house prices. Just wait for 2017 and vent your spleen away.

                    – DId you check how many sporting uniforms don’t have the union jack at all, and in fact only have the silver fern? Silver Union Jacks, anyone? Black Union Jacks, darlings?

                    – This is a binding referendum. Check the label on the tin.

                    – What principle is the left defending by opposing the new flag design? I’m failing to detect one.

                    • Muttonbird …
                      6 March 2016 at 3:37 pm

                      You’re upset now. I’ll leave you to your lie down.

                    • Gangnam Style …
                      6 March 2016 at 3:42 pm

                      Key wanted the silver fern on black flag, but the copyright holders said no, so he went for (in his view) the next best thing. Weak.

                    • sabine …
                      6 March 2016 at 3:48 pm

                      – and I asked you about the constitutional monarchy that we are and what to do about this. Changing the flag is window dressing it does not change a thing. Read, and please answer. thanks.

                      – some made a great deal about it, others like me did not. This site is a site for many and as i said you vote, i vote, everyone votes. Democracy.

                      – the silver fern is a trademark for the Rugby Union, if others wear it they would have to pay for the privilege. The flag is a national symbol, not presenting a sports team but a nation. Not all people in this nation care about sports, or rugby or anything.

                      – I have listed my principles below, care to read? I have also been on record since the beginning as to why i oppose the flag change. I give you a hint, it has got to do with money, that according to the current National led government we only have for things, but not for people. i.e. feed the kids, build a few houses, buy some meds for sick people n stuff.

                      Again, you have your vote, i have mine, but you and your party do not get to school anyone here on principles as you and your party have none, you have a need for authoritarianism, a need for knee pads and full bank accounts. 🙂

    • Puddleglum 2.5
      7 March 2016 at 4:40 pm

      “– NZ fully mature enough to change”

      Changing a symbol before changing the reality can be a sign of immaturity as much as maturity (e.g., buying a flash car to ‘symbolise’ your success when you had to go into crippling debt to do it).

      Changing the flag without changing anything related to really being a mature nation (think Five Eyes, the subordinate posture our military adopts to the Brits, stepping up the Royal Tours, etc.) is a sign of something alright but maturity as a nation isn’t what it shows.

      “– well overdue and an important start”

      Debatable that it’s an ‘important start’ – just as likely to be an impediment to becoming a republic. Changing the flag hasn’t helped the Canadians along that path has it?

      Keeping the ‘thorn in the side’ has its advantages if you want substantive change as opposed to removing the thorn and then kidding yourself that you’ve proved you’re suddenly showing your maturity and ‘independence’ by changing designs on a piece of cloth.

  3. mikesh 3
    6 March 2016 at 9:17 am

    The proposed alternative has too many symbols.
    We should decide whether we want a silver fern leaf or a southern cross, or something else. True, the old flag has the union jack and the southern cross but, in that case, the two symbols each meant something.
    But, regardless of the relative merits of the two flags, I think we should stick with the flag we’ve got until the flag designers come up with something worth voting for.

  4. BLiP 4
    6 March 2016 at 9:29 am

    ‘

    I voted for the existing flag because nothing significant about New Zealand has changed in order to merit a change of flag. Any change at this stage is meaningless emotional clap trap.

    • tinfoilhat 4.1
      6 March 2016 at 9:50 am

      That’s a good rationale for your vote, too many people seem to have voted along political lines which I think is a poor way to choose a flag.

      My husband and I both gave our voting papers to our two eldest grandchildren (of non voting age) to let them have a voice as they’ll have to live with their choice a lot longer than we will.

      • BLiP 4.1.1
        6 March 2016 at 9:52 am

        ‘

        What a good idea. Wish I’d thought to give my vote to a youngster, too.

        • Maz 4.1.1.1
          6 March 2016 at 7:26 pm

          Yes, we gave our papers to our 14 year old to tick his preference. No coincidence that it was the same choices we would have made.

    • Ffloyd 4.2
      6 March 2016 at 10:02 am

      Blip. Absolutely 100% agree. To no 4 above.

  5. Stuart Munro 5
    6 March 2016 at 9:30 am

    I voted to keep the real one – laser kiwi got knocked back for being too aspirational. Hundertwasser’s would’ve been good too.

    While we’re on the subject of republics and such – I’m not having a steaming pile of crap like Brownlee or Key as head of state. The job requires intelligent ethical and respectable persons. Liz or Charles is way better than any of the kleptocrats – even though they are remote and largely unconcerned with NZ.

    • Ad 5.1
      6 March 2016 at 10:58 am

      I’d want a direct vote, not simply a vote by majority of Parliament. But any citizen should be free to have a crack. Even Penny Bright.

      • Stuart Munro 5.1.1
        6 March 2016 at 11:53 am

        As far as process goes I agree – but I’m just not having certain people as head of state. That prominent guy. The whale. Collins. There are minimum standards that must be met. Procedural neutrality would probably exclude them – which means of course that the Gnats would rort the process like they do everything else. Sticking with Lizzy and the Charlie until a tradeup is available.

  6. weka 6
    6 March 2016 at 9:51 am

    I read a post about the flag on The Spinoff yesterday which was interesting in itself (it was written by a designer who thinks the teatowel is ridiculous although he put it more kindly than that). One thing that stood out was his argument that young people should have more input/say because they’re going to be using any new flag the longest. In this post on ts we have the oldies saying that their values are important because they’ve had the longest tradition with the existing flag (and a bloody serious tradition at that). What strikes me is the gap between those two groups of people, which I would suggest is the biggest its been in my lifetime (since mid 60s). Maybe that’s part of the problem.

    http://thespinoff.co.nz/03-03-2016/a-designers-last-lament-for-this-whole-sorry-flag-fiasco/

    • sabine 6.1
      6 March 2016 at 11:29 am

      Interesting that we would give young people more say in regards to the flag, but not on issues that really affect them longterm such as studentloans, interest charged on studentloans, lack of housing for students, lack of housing for young families, lack of options to buying houses, lack of jobs, lack of opportunities all over the country, lack of good paying jobs, and so on and so on.

      All these issues affect young people more then the friggin flag.

      Personally i think that the voting age should be lowered to 16.
      16 year olds in NZ manage full time school, with part time work, often they volonteer, work on family farms and family business, they have to map a future that depends more and more on global markets, and generally speaking are quite mature for their age.
      Then this whole, let them vote for the teatowel because they have to live longer with it would not sound so out of touch really.

      • weka 6.1.1
        6 March 2016 at 11:48 am

        In our societies we don’t mature as quicky as in the past. 16 seems too young to me. Some 16 year olds seem capable of making informed decisions about voting, but plenty don’t. I’d probably change my mind if we had a solid decade of teaching civics in high school (including local body politics) and there was some evidence that teenagers were developping political skills and experience.

        • sabine 6.1.1.1
          6 March 2016 at 12:02 pm

          i have quite a few 16 year olds around me, and most of them make more sense then their parents.

          they know the need of rules and regulations in regards to the environment
          they all seem to know that taking the bus is more sensible than using a car
          they all save money, after spending most of it
          they all know how to apply for accom benefits, for student loans, for student allowances, something more often then not their parents don’t know.
          they live in the now and for the future, while most of their parents live in the past, and wish for nothing more then the past to return etc etc.

          i am all in favour of giving 16 year olds the vote. The decisions made today will affect them more then anyone of us, yet we consider them not old enough to vote. Heck, most adults are hardly informed, have forgotten what they were thought in schools and have no political skills and experience other then tick a box every three years.

          and considering the last 30 years, fuck seriously the young one could have not fucked it up more or less thourough then the supposed adults in the room did.

          Also consider that Donald Trump is a respectable adult, and so is Hillary Clinton.

          • weka 6.1.1.1.1
            6 March 2016 at 12:15 pm

            “i have quite a few 16 year olds around me, and most of them make more sense then their parents.”

            Are you saying that in general 16 yr old NZers all of a similar (high-ish) political intelligence? That would make them a truly remarkable generation.

            I see teenagers spread across the spectrum of intelligence just like all other age groups. I’m not really in favour of ageism that says some ages are smarter than others. It’s tricky with age though, because time does equate to experience, and over classes of people (eg age) that’s hard to get around.

            “Also consider that Donald Trump is a respectable adult, and so is Hillary Clinton.”

            For every Trump or Clinton there are equally stupid teenagers. Sorry, but that argument doesn’t work.

              • weka …
                6 March 2016 at 12:29 pm

                I think it’s the wrong question. We lowered the drinking age to 18 from 20 and are suffering the consequences, not because teenagers can’t be responsible for their behaviour, but because as a society (all of us) we’re increasingly useless at protecting and promoting civil wellbeing. It’s not that there is anything wrong with lowering the voting age per se, it’s that we’re too stupid as a society at the moment to do that well and in a way that doesn’t create more problems. Would lowering the age by a year or 2 help or hinder that? I don’t know, but I do think the more pertinent question is how well educated is the population as a whole about civics? And should we be doing something about that? (which may or may not eventually include lowering the age).

                There was a good interview on Nine to Noon during the week with a guy who is working with schools to get them to re-allow students to do things like climb trees and play bullrush. The theory (and there is good evidence to support this now I think) is that in recent decades we’ve been too focussed on protecting children so that they aren’t learning adequate risk assessment skills. To me that’s a big red flag that we’re raising children to be less suited to making good decisions. That’s not just about tree climbing, we can see it in many aspects of society now.

                • RedLogix …
                  6 March 2016 at 1:18 pm

                  The theory (and there is good evidence to support this now I think) is that in recent decades we’ve been too focussed on protecting children so that they aren’t learning adequate risk assessment skills. To me that’s a big red flag that we’re raising children to be less suited to making good decisions. That’s not just about tree climbing, we can see it in many aspects of society now.

                  Absolutely. As I’ve mentioned before, much of my life has been shaped by my primary passion – time in our mountains and forests tramping and climbing. Although admittedly less of the latter as the years go by.

                  It has created in me an appreciation of the rewards of taking risks. A sense of how deeply satisfying it can be to tackle something maybe forbidding and uncomfortable, and overcome your own reservations and fears. It is the wet, miserable, challenging and sometimes dangerous trips that I definitely remember most fondly. The ones where the unexpected went wrong and we figured a way through it are the ones that leap to mind most vividly.

                  Of course I always go into the hills with the expectation of returning home in one mostly intact piece.

                  This is why taking risks has also shaped me as a cautious character. Always I’m conscious of the weather, the terrain, the people I’m with. Where is our nearest point of safety and shelter. What could go wrong here, and what is Plan B or C? At what point are we going to turn back if it just get’s too crazy?

                  Risk cannot be made to go away. It is stuff of life. Children and teenagers especially need to learn how to recognise it, evaluate it and most importantly discover their own inner resources to confront it. Every time they go through discomfort, difficulties and danger … they learn something vital about themselves, and about life itself. Both their own unrealized potential and it’s limits. Both how amazingly strong they can be and how fragile life itself can be.

                  And most importantly they learn to place a value on both themselves and the gift of life itself.

                • pat …
                  6 March 2016 at 9:04 pm

                  all valid points but none deal with the simple fact that if you apply a level of understanding/competence as a measure of requirement to vote then there could be an awful lot of people not qualified….and who decides? A slippery slope I would suggest should never be contemplated.

                  If we consider people are fully responsible for their actions in the criminal justice system at age 17 that suggests to me that same age should be considered appropriate to elect those that make those laws…or conversely raise the age of being tried as an adult to that of the voting age.

                  • weka …
                    6 March 2016 at 9:34 pm

                    Two things I suppose. One is that we’re not starting from a perfect place, we’re in an imperfect place. I don’t think lowering the age per se is a useful response to that (teaching civics and then looking at lowering the age might be).

                    The other is that 16 yr olds aren’t like older voters. Experience matters. There’s nothing wrong with being 16, or voting at 16 or drinking at 16 or having sex, serving in the army etc. But it’s not smart to think that any of those things at 16 are the same as 26. That’s why I basically reject Sabine’s argument that yoof are better than everyone else, or that they’re not as bad as people make out. I’m saying they’re different and that’s not a bad thing, it’s just something we should take into account.

                    Re the justice system, why did they decide 17? And why use the criminal justice system as the bar? If parliament makes laws that affect children, why not let children vote?

                    We fucked up the drinking age because we thought that it was the age that was important. It’s not. It’s what we are doing as a society to mature as individuals and collectively that is.

                    So yes, plenty of adults shouldn’t be voting if, say, understanding of civics was a criteria, but I’m not actually suggesting that it should be (I’m suggesting that education about civics is one solution, not that absence of it is one cause). I’m suggesting that if we want to improve the franchise, lowering the vote isn’t the place to start.

                    • pat …
                      6 March 2016 at 10:05 pm

                      I don’t know why 17 has been determined the age of adult criminal liability, but it does make me wonder why we have an age for voting….what would be the objection to having no age restriction on voting? If you can travel to a polling both and fill out the form then your vote counts, granted that very young children may be more likely to cast an invalid vote but in principle why not? are children not also citizens?

                    • weka …
                      6 March 2016 at 10:54 pm

                      I certainly think that children should have more power and more say in what affects them. The democracy we have at the moment is a pretty low level democracy. A better one would devise systems so that people were represented fairly, and could have input into how things are managed. But that doesn’t mean that the current system should afford younger people the same powers as older ones. Maturity is an actual thing.

                      edited (don’t know why I said votes instead of power 😉 ).

                    • pat …
                      6 March 2016 at 11:23 pm

                      http://www.elections.org.nz/voters/enrol-check-or-update-now/who-can-and-cant-enrol

                      maturity may be an actual thing but is not universal….I can think of no objection to children voting that is not conveniently ignored among the over 18 aged population….if you can i would be interested to know what it is

                    • weka …
                      7 March 2016 at 1:51 pm

                      We’re using the word maturity differently. The maturity I am talking is universal.

                      An 8 year old often isn’t capable of making decisions that affect the long term, their brains aren’t developped in that way. That’s why we have deliniations between adult responsibilities and children’s ones. We don’t let children take responsibility for whether it’s ok to have sex for instance. Or driving. Or health care. Or many other things that require an ability to understand risk and what it means over time.

                      No problem with having children’s caucuses though.

            • sabine 6.1.1.1.1.2
              6 March 2016 at 12:36 pm

              I am saying that generally speaking 16 year olds and even younger ones are not as bad as many would like to make them.

              I am saying that many 16 year olds manage full time school with part time work while not being chauffeured around by momma.

              I am saying that many 16 year olds are volonteers, assisting clean up crews on rivers/oceans, etc etc

              I am saying that most 16 year olds know that the environment is pretty fucked as it is, and will be most likely more fucked once they come of age, and that we expect them then to clean up the mess that us adults have left them with.

              I am saying that pretty much all of the 16 year olds of today are not responsible for the mess that is todays political landscape.

              I am saying that pretty much most of the 16 year olds have seen unemployment in their families, have seen devastating illness in their family, have seen suicide, mental illness and the likes in their families and their circle of friends. I am saying that most 16 year olds have seen their parents juggle credit cards, and bills.

              I am saying that not all 16 year olds are as obnoxious as Mr. Trump or Mrs. Clinton, and that if 16 year olds could vote they probable would. However once they come of age, they see what we – as a society gave them – and at that stage they don’t see a reason any-more to participate.

              I am saying that the supposed adults in the room have proven on more then one occasion that all they are good for is lining their own pockets, lying outright, not getting the country forward, spinning their own shit until they believe it, and that the young ones may have the enthusiasm and the ‘innocence’ and creativity that our jaded, and self-serving political calls has long ago sold to the highest bidder.

              And Donald J Trump and Hillary Clinton are what we call respectable overachieving adults and people – only over 18 – will get to vote for them. Don’t you feel saver yet?

              • weka …
                6 March 2016 at 2:13 pm

                “I am saying that generally speaking 16 year olds and even younger ones are not as bad as many would like to make them.”

                Not sure who the many are in that sentence, but it’s not me. I think 16 year olds are the same as every other year, no better no worse. There are good ones, bad ones and all the ones in between. Additionally, many lack the experience that I consider important to be given the franchise. We could do things to remedy that (civics lessons), but in the abcence of that I don’t want a group of humans who haven’t even developped basic life management and risk assessment skills (as a class) yet to be given voting power. I don’t care how many 16 year olds there are who are good at those things, it’s not the greater majority. Not because there is anything wrong with them, and sure, some of them understand the things you say, it’s because they just haven’t had enough time on the planet yet.

                You haven’t produced any evidence that 16 year olds are better at voting than older age groups. All the people voting for Trump today were 16 once. Are you saying that they wouldn’t have voted for Trump at 16, but by the time they were 20 they would? That seems very unlikely.

                You’ve also pretty much completely ignored all the arguments I made, so I’ll assume now that you aren’t interested in a conversation so much as wanting a megaphone for your own views. Maybe you should try talking at Penny.

                • sabine …
                  6 March 2016 at 5:43 pm

                  @ Weka “Maybe you should try talking at Penny.”

                  really weka, that is it? I have raised valid points, nothing i said was un-polite or rude.

                  And yes, adults are voting and clamouring for either Hillary or Trump or Sanders or simply abstaining because the choices are so bad and you want me to produce evidence that the 16 year olds are worse then the adults in the room?
                  I don’t have to, i think the adults are making such fools out of themselves, that maybe we need to proof that not all adults are self-serving, self-centred individuals out ot make a quick buck , or ready to send the young ones to wars, or to outsource their jobs or to just do fuck all as our current regime here in NZ is doing.

                  I don’t want to give the presidency too sixteen year old , i want to give them the right to vote for a politician that may or may not decide their fate and their future. And that is really not quite the same.

                  As for civic education, do you believe that our young ones with access to the internet, with access to twitter, TV, newspaper are not politically minded and civic minded. Really? Who is going to the demonstrations? Do you think that the young ones would have an issue with marriage for all? equality? Race issues? Do you really think they need education but not the adult population many of whom left school without any degrees, never read a newspaper and get their induction from M. Hoskins, or the other harpies on TV? Really?

                  I do believe that if they can work, and are expected to work, if they are expected to try harder then their parents and grandparents, if they are expected to pay for their schooling with loans and the likes and if they can be treated as adults in the eyes of the law, and if they are expected to clean the environmental mess that us adults leave them with, than I would like them to have the rights of adults and one of these rights would be to vote. After all they can have sex, they can drive a car, they can work, why should they not be able to vote?

                  As for me ignoring your arguments, i have not ignored them i have read them and then i gave you my opinion. That does not mean i ignore your arguments, it just means i don’t agree with them. Again not quite the same.

                  • weka …
                    6 March 2016 at 9:41 pm

                    Go ask your 16 year olds who the local mayor is, and how voting in local body elections works in their rohe. Then come back and tell me about it.

                    Where I come from, talking at people without engaging with them is considered rude. I appreciate you made an effort in your last comment, but it’s late in the day now and I’m focussed on other things. Let’s try again next time.

                    Where I come from talking about a class of people as if they are all the same is a form of chauvinism.

  7. Chooky 7
    6 March 2016 at 10:06 am

    +100 Great poem by Ian Mune…says it all….when I get the papers I will be voting to keep the existing flag as will other family members

  8. North 8
    6 March 2016 at 10:26 am

    This whole flag business was never about New Zealand per se. It was always largely about John Key and the PR fashioning of him as the quintessence of ‘New Zealand’.

    That’s why remonstrations that we should not be political about it are so much nonsense. The rationale underlying my free choice cannot be subject to moral vetting conducted by John Key/his proxies.

    A further point – what’s this crap that we’ll never get another chance ? Who says that ? Oh yes, John Key and proxies.

    • tc 8.1
      6 March 2016 at 11:23 am

      It wasn’t really about a flag either, it’s another distraction whilst the sellout continues and a very effective so far so well played national.

      Whichever way this goes it will dominate the agenda and airwaves…..job done.

      Opposition got sucked in early and should have distanced themselves from it as a waste of money pandering to the PM’s vanity in these austere times.

      If they held that line it would be paying dividends now and some momentum for them maybe.

      • Chooky 8.1.1
        6 March 2016 at 12:01 pm

        +100

      • UncookedSelachimorpha 8.1.2
        6 March 2016 at 12:17 pm

        Good point. New or old flag, National wins by keeping the focus off anything real.

      • sabine 8.1.3
        6 March 2016 at 1:18 pm

        while i agree with you, i can see why dear Leader is trying to shore up support.

        If really 60+ % are against it and vote accordingly that says a lot about his “leadership” and it in effect my not only be a referendum on a flag, but also on the flag bearer.

  9. ankerawshark 9
    6 March 2016 at 10:28 am

    Voting for the old flag. The new flag is a very poor design indeed so on aesthetic grounds alone the Old flag gets my vote.

    But there is a more fundamental reason why I don’t want change. Inequality is increasing, mental health services (in particular in Chch) are significantly underfunded, children are living in poverty and apparently we can’t afford to pay people a living wage. Perhaps they should all eat cake, while we squander public money on something that is not really that significant i.e. a flag.

    And of course JK vanity project is just that. A superficial response attempting to purvey NZ as a brand (with Julie Christie whose on a board that is suppose to promote the use of the flag, on the flag panel).

  10. sabine 10
    6 March 2016 at 11:23 am

    I have voted for the old flag.

    I have also been on record as to why i oppose the change of flag now.
    Money
    if we have to cut vital services because the country is neck deep in debt – private debt, and the 100 billion + that our dear Finance Minister the Double Dipping Blonde from Dipton Mr. Bill English raked up, than we don’t need to spend money on something that we actually don’t need.

    We could build a lot of houses, were they are needed, with that money.
    We could fund a lot of mental health care with that money.
    We could fund a lot of school meals with that money.
    We could fund properly and regionally cooked meals for our elderlies that depend on meals on wheels instead of shipping overcooked card board across the country.
    We could fund fire fighters with this money, so that the country would not depend solely on volunteers to prevent their houses from burning down.
    We could fund a lot of ambulance drivers and vehicles for St. Johns with that money.
    We could fund so much more with the 26+ millions that have been wasted, and we could fund so much more with the next 20 – 50 millions that this project will gobble up if it goes further.
    We could fund a few cops and could keep a few more cop shops open instead of closing them down.

    And of course, why no discussion about leaving the constitutional monarchy behind us, what will we change it for, will we write a constitution – will we do it open sources as was done in Finland? Etc etc etc , and non of this was ever discussed, and now we are down to name calling and othering those that dare to not vote for the official instruction from the national party? Really, this is all that they have left? Insults?
    Pathetic.

    • kenny 10.1
      6 March 2016 at 2:32 pm

      Spot on again, Sabine. How many people could benefit from those $26,000,000 being wasted on Key’s vanity project? If he can find the money for the flag, why can’t he find the money for the people?

      Think about it.

  11. Anne 11
    6 March 2016 at 11:39 am

    Oh wow… thanks for that BLIP.
    Ian Mune. Our most talented actor ever. It’s a joy to listen to him. He is also the voice of experience and wisdom which is a darn sight more than you can say about the juvenile media pretenders who profess to know what they are talking about when they rubbish the current flag.

    Yet another symbol of the shallow, ignorant, self-serving, tunnel visioned values of this NAct govt.

    Thank you again.

    • Murray Simmonds 11.1
      6 March 2016 at 1:42 pm

      Yep, 100% Anne.

      I usually skip over poetry, ‘cos somehow just reading it to myself does nothing for me.

      But HEARING it read by someone like Ian Mune is a VERY different proposition. I’ve always had the utmost respect for Ian Mune – an actor of the old school. A school in which PERSONAL INTEGRITY played a large part. Add that to a prodigious talent . . . . and there you have it!

      Thanks BLiP for a very nice post. I found Ian Mune’s performance in this, like so much else that he has done, to be utterly convincing and compelling. And touching!

      And then, there’s the tawdry little full-colour, one-eyed , three-page cheap-shot A4 brochure i received in the mail yesterday urging me to vote for the new flag . . . a brochure, which, if you read the small print (and this is the only bit that interested me) was “authorised” by L Holden, 98 Gibbons St, Lower Hutt.

      Well, where my vote is concerned, that one for Ian Mune, zero for L Holden.

      Thanks again BLiP for a great post. Took me a while to wake up to that . . . I must be getting old!

  12. mary_a 12
    6 March 2016 at 11:46 am

    Hear hear, keep the present flag. The time to change will be if/when NZ becomes a republic and needing an ensign to represent our new identity and direction.

    At the time of writing this post, we haven’t received our second voting papers yet, but many in our area have! Anyone else still waiting?

  13. Muttonbird 13
    6 March 2016 at 12:12 pm

    We gave our kids our votes as they are the future and we thought they should be the ones to choose.

    They both voted for the New Zealand flag.

    Those, like the prime minister, saying this is the only chance for change are either lying in order to further their cause, or are very very stupid. As was pointed out by Mr Key’s hagiographer John Roughan yesterday, voting New Zealand flag now leaves us an option to revisit under a properly organised process and in my mind alongside constitutional change. Whereas voting Fern ‘n’ Stars locks that very ordinary design in for generations to come.

    It is by voting for change now that reduces our ability to have a strong and world-class flag represent us in the future.

    • pat 13.1
      6 March 2016 at 12:14 pm

      now thats a novel idea….though wonder if they are strictly valid as they are not registered voters…but what the hell

      • Muttonbird 13.1.1
        6 March 2016 at 1:00 pm

        I think it’s fine. On being challenged I can say we asked them their opinion, we valued their opinion, and voted accordingly.

        • Andre 13.1.1.1
          6 March 2016 at 1:29 pm

          The only legitimate question is if it’s your freely made choice, ie you were not coerced. Why you made your free choice is nobody else’s fucking business.

          • cogito 13.1.1.1.1
            6 March 2016 at 6:11 pm

            “if it’s your freely made choice, ie you were not coerced”

            Hard to be sure in these days of Natzi manipulation, rants, spin and propaganda…. and even veiled threats….

            Not the hallmarks of a fair and even-handed democracy.

        • pat 13.1.1.2
          6 March 2016 at 9:21 pm

          i think its more than fine, its a great idea …was being a little pedantic about legitimacy

  14. maui 14
    6 March 2016 at 12:23 pm

    I’ve just noticed that you can’t look at the fern flag for a prolonged amount of time. It has that unfortunate complex pattern like the New Zealand Trade & Enterprise fern logo, and the different colours top and bottom don’t help either, it seems to bring about dizzy spells and headaches if you stare at it.

    • Muttonbird 14.1
      6 March 2016 at 1:03 pm

      It’s been pointed out that this generic fern design has the very real prospect of becoming dated because of its complexity. This is one of the reasons complex elements should have no place on national flags…

      Not that Ad would consider that.

  15. happynz 15
    6 March 2016 at 1:10 pm

    My household of three ticked the box next to the current flag.

  16. Muttonbird 16
    6 March 2016 at 1:21 pm

    Can I just ask that the New Zealand flag is called ‘the New Zealand flag’?

    Not ‘the current flag”

    Not ‘the existing flag’

    These terms drape a temporary or unstable connotation over or national flag, ffs!

  17. Ad 17
    6 March 2016 at 2:18 pm

    The proposed flag doesn’t propose to do away with the Southern Cross.
    Which kinda undercuts this entire sad piece of doggerel.

    Ian Mune is beginning to sound like those dudes in South Carolina who just couldn’t imagine taking down the Confederate cross flag.

    • BLiP 17.1
      6 March 2016 at 2:27 pm

      Ian Mune is beginning to sound like those dudes in South Carolina who just couldn’t imagine taking down the Confederate cross flag.

      Heh! Ad hom and false analogy.

      • Ad 17.1.1
        6 March 2016 at 2:43 pm

        It’s really time we stuck into the symbolism of what’s being replaced, not the mere process around it.

        So let’s cover ourselves with the Union Jack here. That’s what’s being defended by Mr Mune. He’s in full Shakesperean rant, covered just in the old flag, Union Jack prominent and proud.

        The casket-soaked bloodiness of it. Ooooh he loves that. The swelling land Of Hope And Glory of it. I can hear him singing it. The great 1860s land-grab of it. The original Waitangi fly-pole chopping of it. Ooops maybe he’s not so sure there. The carrying of it down south Auckland, through the Waikato, into the forest of it. Oooh darn. The wastrel filth of the Queen and all her tribe of inbreds we’re supposed to worship. Hmmm not so good. The good-old-fashioned global-colonial conquest red map of it. Ah safer ground there it reminds him of Primary School. The sincere eradication of its symbolic force in every post-Empire country and every Commonwealth country of it (bar just a few). The great roaring pride of ‘everything we’ve ever done means nothing can be done about anything we will ever do’ of it. Now there’s an argument to really wrap conservative principles in. IN the end he’s reduced to proud!gurglegugle!nochange!argleburgle!Lorde, because I’m down with the kids! I have nothing on underneath this! Waaaargh! I AM MUNE!!!

        If Ian Mune’s arms waved any faster and broader he’d have to collect his left fingers from Fiji, his right wrist from Malaysia, and his elbows from South Africa. All of whom had the presence of mind to ditch the Union Jack some time ago.

        • BLiP 17.1.1.1
          6 March 2016 at 3:16 pm

          ‘

          Keep it up. Shooting the messenger – in this case, a Kiwi living legend – is really helping you make the case for adopting John Key’s flag.

          • Ad 17.1.1.1.1
            6 March 2016 at 3:20 pm

            Any time you’re ready to make a point.

            Oh wait, it’s because….. celebrity!!

            • BLiP 17.1.1.1.1.1
              6 March 2016 at 3:26 pm

              ‘

              I’m just enjoying you floundering around in desperation. 🙂

              • Ad …
                6 March 2016 at 3:29 pm

                Oh don’t worry I know I’m in a minority position here.
                And that my vote will lose. I’m ok. Truly.

                • Muttonbird …
                  6 March 2016 at 3:41 pm

                  Are you really? You seem quite emotional now that people have challenged your establishment ideas.

                  This ‘anything but the New Zealand flag’ road you and many other changers are taking is appallingly short-sighted.

                  • Ad …
                    6 March 2016 at 4:23 pm

                    I was happy to respond to the emotion of Mr Mune in kind.
                    Helpfully I’m not the one defending the establishment.

        • Gabby 17.1.1.2
          6 March 2016 at 5:30 pm

          When you put it like that, it’s quite a flag isn’t it? Maybe we could make the Union bit a wee bit bigger.

        • Andre 17.1.1.3
          6 March 2016 at 5:53 pm

          Now that it’s not breaking the flow of an exceptional rant, may I point out that when Mr Mune goes to retrieve his left fingers, he will find them under a small Union Jack with a lovely baby blue field.

        • North 17.1.1.4
          6 March 2016 at 6:17 pm

          Ad……an entertaining rant at 17.1.1 – I’m sure Ian Mune will love it……I certainly do.

          Particularly the ” gurglegugle!nochange!argleburgle! ” part.

          Redolent of that ARD Fairburn effort sending up the diction of Michael Joseph Savage. Which, hilariously, 80 years on, is strikingly apposite in respect of the diction of the Man Child PM. Eckshilly…….

          http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/tei-FaiWoma-t1-body-d1-d2.html

          • sabine 17.1.1.4.1
            6 March 2016 at 6:22 pm

            that link led to excellent reading. fun ensued n such. thanks for the laugh.

        • locus 17.1.1.5
          6 March 2016 at 8:47 pm

          Whoa… an appeal to populism that’s not working for you Ad?

    • Stuart Munro 17.2
      6 March 2016 at 2:34 pm

      Isn’t that how a successful flag is supposed to make people feel? To be a rallying symbol? It makes some kind of sense for Key to be hard-selling the bacon wrapper to blunt unifying opposition as he prepares to use the TPP to introduce a raft of pro-corporate ‘reforms’ that NZ needs to resist en bloc.

  18. Ffloyd 18
    6 March 2016 at 4:03 pm

    What’s going to happen when the All Blacks start LOSING all their games. The imposter FERN flag will be an International laughing stock, seeing as this whole farce seems predicated on Richie and the boys having FERNS on their shirts, as well as IAG.

    • Chooky 18.1
      6 March 2016 at 4:53 pm

      +100 Ffloyd …The All Blacks can keep their black shirts and silver ferns…we will keep our NZ flag which means so much more to New Zealanders about our history than mere rugby

      ….there are many in New Zealand who don’t like the All Blacks anyway ( remembering the Springbok Tour )

      …it is about time the All Blacks realised they are not Gods …but mere mortals…and they will have all sorts of creepy illegitimate hangers on who want to leverage off them

      ….as a New Zealand hero give me a Ranganui Walker and an Edmund Hillary and Ian Mune any day

    • DavidC 18.2
      6 March 2016 at 5:05 pm

      Ffloyd
      When the ABs lose all their games lets worry about that, it hasn’t ever happened yet in 100 odd years.

      • Ffloyd 18.2.1
        6 March 2016 at 7:29 pm

        DavidC. I have noticed over the years that anyone who aligns themselves with Key seem to come to a sticky end, so the likelihood of the AB’s losing their mojo is quite high.

    • cogito 18.3
      6 March 2016 at 5:56 pm

      You have a point. The fish skeleton/white feather could become embarrassing indeed…!

      Just imagine the tv commentary…
      “….So here we have it. The New Zealanders suffering a most embarrassing defeat. It seems somewhat fitting, possibly even ironic or prophetic, that their new national symbol resembles a giant white feather. It remains to be seen whether they are capable of shaking off the significance of that imagery and rediscover their past form…”

      LOL.

  19. rod 19
    6 March 2016 at 5:31 pm

    The trouble with the so called silver fern flag is all the pro changers don’t know the difference between silver and white, which it will be.

    • DavidC 19.1
      6 March 2016 at 5:59 pm

      rod.
      Either white or silver or brass (or bronze?) has been used in the past.
      But the fern is definitely our NZ symbol.

      • sabine 19.1.1
        6 March 2016 at 6:02 pm

        but the white thing on the dishrag is not a fern.

        its a dildo feather
        its an unkempt ponytail
        its a surrender feather

        its so many things, but it was never a fern.

        • DavidC 19.1.1.1
          6 March 2016 at 6:06 pm

          sabine.

          you need yours eyes checked and your dosage upped.

          • sabine 19.1.1.1.1
            6 March 2016 at 6:12 pm

            good grief mate, ever since that dildo flag, and then lately the images with the ponytail i have used brain bleach even, but mine eyes can not unsee. Its tragic I know. 🙂

          • North 19.1.1.1.2
            6 March 2016 at 6:47 pm

            Yes Sabine…….your eyes chocked and your dowager whipped !

        • Graeme 19.1.1.2
          6 March 2016 at 8:10 pm

          You get it Sabine.

          We have a reasonably botanically correct fern as a primary element of our business branding, and in one usage, our open sign, there’s no fern text. A common question over the counter from international visitors is “what’s with the feather?” It leads to some interesting conversations. I can assure you the Lockwood device requires considerable explanation to get people to understand that we’re not having a white feather on our flag.

          The fern only means something to New Zealanders, and then it gets pretty amorphous on sporting or military grounds. There’s not much on the constitutional, national, ethnic or social development of our nation.

      • Muttonbird 19.1.2
        6 March 2016 at 7:26 pm

        It is a symbol of New Zealand but wholly inappropriate design-wise for use on a national flag which by definition is supposed to remain current for many, many generations.

      • Anne 19.1.3
        6 March 2016 at 7:47 pm

        DavidC @19.1

        Really? I thought the Kiwi was our National emblem. Are you saying the white fern (which doesn’t exist) is going to Trump the Kiwi? Yeah right.

        • Whispering Kate 19.1.3.1
          6 March 2016 at 9:01 pm

          During WW11 up in the Pacific Islands it was commonly heard by the the American servicemen, when seeing a kiwi stamped on the sides of freight shipped from New Zealand to say “hey what’s with that funny looking squatting duck you have stamped there”. The kiwi is definitely a New Zealand icon but its an odd looking creature and not really suitable for a flag. Just an observation. Neither is the white feather.

        • DavidC 19.1.3.2
          6 March 2016 at 9:08 pm

          Anne
          Any examples of the kiwi being used to represent NZ a hundred years ago?
          There were 12.000 troops at Galopili who wore the fern

          • Mary M 19.1.3.2.1
            6 March 2016 at 9:16 pm

            “David, the usurper found drowned, head first in toilet”

            • DavidC 19.1.3.2.1.1
              6 March 2016 at 9:47 pm

              Far worst of all, the fever had settled in Mary’s eyes, and Mary was blind.

          • cogito 19.1.3.2.2
            6 March 2016 at 9:29 pm

            “Galopili”

            Tell you what, mate, it’s just as well you weren’t there with them as you would still be looking for it on the map!

      • locus 19.1.4
        6 March 2016 at 9:45 pm

        Yes DC but different versions of the fern carry different ideas of NZ. To me the lockwood version is a business logo stylised on a sporting logo.

        When Aotearoa New Zealand has a belief in its unique identity, culture and independence, then is the time to replace the flag of the past with one that more meaningfully encapsulates our sense of nationhood.

        I really hope that when the time comes, New Zealanders will place the koru at the heart of our flag. The koru is strongly represented in Maori art. It conveys our natural environment. Symbolically it’s unfurling is a strong positive idea – reflecting expectations, growth, hopes, the future…..

        I think Hundertwasser undertood this. His flag design simply and powerfully brings together these ideas of who we are and wish to be. The koru symbol conveys so much about why I’m proud to call myself a New Zealander

        • DavidC 19.1.4.1
          6 March 2016 at 10:10 pm

          Is there a worse example of a corporate logo than the koru? It didn’t exist internationally until airnz put it on the arse of the planes

        • cogito 19.1.4.2
          6 March 2016 at 11:26 pm

          The problem with flags is that there’s a temptation to try and incorporate too much into them.

          A lot of European countries have very simple flags…

          The history of the Irish flag is quite interesting…

          “The green represents the older Gaelic and Anglo-Norman element in the population, while the orange represents the Protestant planter stock, supporters of William of Orange. The meaning of the white was well expressed by Meagher when he introduced the flag. ‘The white in the centre’, he said, ‘signifies a lasting truce between the ‘Orange’ and the ‘Green’ and I trust that beneath its folds the hands of the Irish Protestant and the Irish Catholic may be clasped in heroic brotherhood.’ ”
          http://www.proud2beirish.com/National-Flag.htm

          Perfect….

  20. NZJester 20
    6 March 2016 at 9:34 pm

    It might not have been made our official flag to 1902 but our current flag has been in used here since 1869. The Australian flags design was not created till 1901.
    Wikipedia say that our current flag was flown unofficially in battle by NZ troops in 1915 at Gallipoli.

  21. NZJester 21
    6 March 2016 at 9:51 pm

    Any change of flag needs to be properly worked through with a panel that is not appointed just by the government but by consensus between all the political parties and should include proper flag experts.
    The whole process would need to be handled over a few years and not the short amount of time the government gave.
    Proper conciliation of the public also needs to be taken to short list the flags and not ram rodded through like those chosen for the first referendum by the panel without any real preliminary public conciliation.

  22. cogito 22
    7 March 2016 at 10:20 am

    Boy…. the Herald are scraping the bottom of the barrel with this one…! What was Trump’s phrase…. “I love the uneducated” was it…. The Herald are certainly doing that.

    The beginner’s guide to NZ’s flags dilemmas
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11601063

    Was that Key’s shadow lurking in the background…?

  23. S 23
    9 March 2016 at 2:55 am

    I vote for aspiration. I vote for a flag which represents the best of NZ.

    One which wants to make sure everyone gets a fair go. One which wants to make sure no-one will starve to death, made to feel ashamed they are to blame for not being able to get a job (because no-one will hire them because they are too old).

    I vote for the current flag.