News
18th June 2009
Government to restore Queen’s Counsel
Yesterday the New Zealand Government announced that it had responded to concerns from the legal profession and will restore the title of Queen’s Counsel to recognise outstanding members of the independent bar.
The Attorney-General, the Hon Christopher Finlayson announced that legislation will be introduced later this year amending the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act. The office of Senior Counsel, created by the previous government to replace Queen’s Counsel in 2008 and which was open to lawyers in firms as well as barristers, will be disestablished.
Eligibility to be appointed as Queen’s Counsel will be restricted in most cases to barristers sole, rather than lawyers in partnerships or firms.
“The title Queen’s Counsel is instantly recognised as providing a certain standard of legal advice both among the New Zealand public and internationally,” said Mr Finlayson.
“However, the government is taking these steps to protect the essential independence of the inner bar,” said Mr Finlayson. “The looser rules for eligibility as Senior Council introduced by the previous government threatened to dilute the independence of our most senior advocates.”
“Queen’s Counsel should be able to advise and represent both law firms and clients who engage them fearlessly and independently, without the potential conflicts and pressures of working in a partnership or incorporated firm.”
“There will be provision to appoint lawyers in firms as Queen’s Counsel where that recognises exceptional legal practice,” Mr Finlayson said. “This is consistent with the established practice of occasionally appointing exceptional lawyers in government and parliamentary counsel as Queen’s Counsel, although they are not members of the independent bar.”
The seven Senior Counsel, who were appointed last year, will have the option of adopting the title of Queen’s Counsel or remaining Senior Counsel.
The Government is to be congratulated for responding to calls from the legal profession and from the wider community for the restoration of Queen's Counsel. These were abolished by the previous Government at least in part as a deliberate move to destroy a royal symbol. This restoration follow soon after the restoration of knighyhoods, and both these changes appear to enjoy widespread public support.
Professor Noel Cox
Chairman
15th March 2009
Knighthoods restored
The recent announcement by the New Zealand Government of the return of titular honours is to be applauded. The restoration of knighthoods was supported by a groundswell of public opinion, and was indeed overdue. Thankfully the Government recognised this, and has returned the Royal Honours system to its pre-2000 state.
The decision to remove titles, such as Dame or Sir, had denied the community a public and enduring opportunity to celebrate success. The Monarchist League encouraged the Government to restore titular honours to recognise the contribution of outstanding individuals, thereby conveying a greater visibility than do post-nominal letters alone. Happily the advocates for the restoration of knighthoods eventually prevailed.
Professor Noel Cox
Chairman
8th January 2009
The restoration of knighthoods
The Monarchist League of New Zealand supports the call by the Editor of the New Zealand Herald to return to titular honours, and to place the Honours Secretariat under the auspices of the Governor-General. The restoration of knighthoods is supported by a groundswell of public opinion.
The decision to remove titles, such as Dame or Sir, denied the community a public and enduring opportunity to celebrate success. The League encourages the Government to restore titular honours to recognise the contribution of outstanding individuals, thereby conveying a greater visibility than do post-nominal letters alone.
The League also welcomes the New Zealand Herald's call to place the Honours Secretariat under the jurisdiction of the Governor-General. The current Secretariat within the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet creates an unnecessary perception of bias or political control. Having honours managed by the Governor-General would reinforce the neutrality of the system, and truly be an expression of celebration for the entire community.
The Honours systems of Canada and Australia are already managed by the Governor-General's offices. The United Kingdom has also, recently, taken steps to make their Honours system more overtly apolitical.
The League welcomes an opportunity to discuss changes further. Some suggestions currently presented include:
That to further recognise Maori culture and language, the League encourages the Government to consider creating an optional Maori title for those who would prefer to use that.
That people should hold titles in their own right, and their partners should not have a companion title. Currently, the wife of a Knight is called a Lady but the husband of a Dame has no title. This imbalance can be corrected by discontinuing any future companion titles.
That the title of Dame could be replaced by Lady. Some consider that Dame is not a titled universally welcomed by women. There is precedent for a change. Women who are admitted to the Order of the Garter, which is the oldest surviving Order of Chivalry in the world, carry the title Lady not Dame, a title which only dates from the foundation of the Order of the British Empire, in 1917.
Professor Noel Cox
Chairman
14th November 2008
Monarchist League launches new website
The Monarchist League of New Zealand is pleased to announce the launch of its new website &ndash www.monarchy.org.nz. Titled Monarchy NZ, the site is the League&rsquos latest activity aimed at promoting the marvellous institution that is New Zealand&rsquos constitutional monarchy.
League chairperson, Professor Noel Cox, believes that this &ldquois an opportunity for all New Zealanders to better understand the importance of our constitutional system. In understanding the structure, symbols, persons, and place of the monarchy in modern-day New Zealand, we are all playing our part in preserving our healthy democracy.&rdquo
The sites was launched on 14th November, the birthday of the heir to throne, Prince Charles.
The site will continue to be updated, and can be found at www.monarchy.org.nz
Professor Noel Cox
Chairman
Press Release
12th November 2008
Bells to Ring in Honour of New Zealand's Crown Prince
To mark the sixtieth birthday of the heir to the throne of New Zealand, Prince Charles (the Prince of Wales), bell towers across New Zealand are joining together to ring in his honour. The ringing of bells is a centuries-old art and is an audible sign of celebration.
"This is an opportunity to make a little bit of noise to recognise the birthday of the heir,” says Auckland ringer John Dunn. "We're ringing for Prince Charles, to recognise his place in our nation."
Groups of between six and twelve ringers will perform for about an hour in several cities. Dunedin and Hamilton ringers will ring on 14 November, while Auckland ringers will ring the day before and Wellington ringers will ring the day after.
On Friday the Monarchist League will be hosting a Reception to mark the 60th birthday of the Prince of Wales, at the Selwyn Library, Parnell, Auckland.
Professor Noel Cox
Chairman
Ian Beresford Madden
Long-standing member and former Vice-Chairman of the Monarchist League of New Zealand, Ian Madden, MA LLB FSA(Scot) FHSNZ, has died. Mr Madden was born 27 February 1931, the only son of Charles and Madge Madden. After serving as a teacher at Otahuhu College 1956-57, he became a legal officer with the State Advances Corporation in Auckland (1958-66). He was later a staff member of various law firms (including Earl Kent Massey & Co.), and was admitted as a Barrister and Solicitor of the High Court of New Zealand in 1971. He also worked in local government, and for various companies 1967-76, latterly as a property manager.
A keen historian, he wrote Riverhead: The Kaipara gateway: an historical record of the upper reaches of the Waitemata Harbour (Riverhead Jubilee Association, 1966), and was one time President of the Auckland Historical Society. He was also a prominent founding member of the Heraldry Society (New Zealand Branch) - now the Heraldry Society of New Zealand - and was a member of the Council from 1962, and more recently 1993-95.
He was a Councillor of the Monarchist League 2000-2004, and Vice-Chairman 2004-2005. Ian Madden passed away on 13 August in the Elizabeth Knox Hospital, Epsom, Auckland, aged 77. His funeral will be at 10 am on Saturday 16 August 2008 at All Souls Chapel, Purewa Cemetery and Crematorium, 100-102 St Johns Road, Meadowbank, Auckland.
Professor Noel Cox
Chairman
A Constitutional History of the New Zealand Monarchy
This 332-page book by Professor Noel Cox, was published by V.D.M. Verlag Dr. Müller Aktiengesellschaft & Co. K.G., Saarbrücken, 2008. ISBN 978-3-639-00877-7. This is the first in-depth study of the Crown in New Zealand, and is available from Amazon and other on-line book suppliers.
Press Release
19th January 2008
In the immediate aftermath of the death of the late Sir Edmund Hillary, KG ONZ KBE, there were reports that a senior member of the Royal Family might attend the funeral. When it was announced that this was unlikely to happen there was a reaction, in some sections of the media and the general public, reminiscent of the hysterical reaction after the death of the late Diana Princess of Wales, when the flag on Buckingham Palace was not flown at half mast. Some commentators spoke of a snub or slight to New Zealand.
The reality is that members of the Royal Family simply do not attend the funerals of prominent people, however exalted. The only exception is for the funerals of past and present heads of State and Government, and royal consorts. It would be remarkable if a member of the Royal Family had come.
Evidence for the high regard in which Sir Edmund was held by the Royal Family is plain to see. He was, after all, knighted by The Queen immediately after the ascent of Mount Everest, which took place at the time of The Queen’s Coronation. He was a Knight of the Garter – an honour which is awarded personally by The Queen, and regularly attended the annual Garter Service at Windsor Castle.
The Queen’s representative in New Zealand is the Governor-General, and Her Majesty has asked the Hon Anand Satyanand to represent her at the funeral. In addition to the initial letter of condolence from Her Majesty – again an unusual honour – and the wreath to be presented at the Lying-in-State, The Queen has offered the Hillary family a memorial service at St George’s Chapel, Windsor, in April.
Sir Edmund, who we have always been told was a modest man, would have been hurt and upset that his death would be used for political purposes, or as an opportunity to attack the Royal Family.
Professor Noel Cox
Chairman,
Press Release
12th March 2007
The Duke of York visiting New Zealand
The Duke of York will be in New Zealand from 14th-22nd March. His Royal Highness will arrive at Auckland International Airport at 1515 on Wednesday 14th, and be met by the Honorary Aide-de-camp to the Governor-General, Wing-Commander John Cummings, RNZAF.
At 1930 on Thursday 15th HRH will attend a Dinner at Government House, Wellington, hosted by the Governor-General. On the following day he will receive a briefing on trade links between New Zealand Trade and Enterprise and the United Kingdom Trade and Investment. HRH, Colonel-in-Chief, will then visit the Royal New Zealand Army Logistic Regiment at Trentham Camp, and attend the 30th anniversary celebrations of the Queen Elizabeth II National Trust, at Lake Pounui, Wairarapa.
HRH will go to the Te Papiouru Marae, Ohinemutu, Rotorua on 17th March, for the ceremony to celebrate the gallantry of Lance Sergeant Haane Manahi during World War II. The Duke will also visit the Rotorua Museum, and attend a special gala dinner hosted by Te Arawa in honour of members of the 28th Maori Battalion.
On Sunday 18th March he will visit Mokoia Island and later that day take part in a re-dedication ceremony at the Auckland War Memorial Museum.
On Monday 19th March HRH will be briefed by the Guild of Air Pilots and Air Navigators, visit the HM Naval Base Devonport, the official opening of new Digital Operating Theatres at Mercy Ascot Hospital, and a reception at the Northern Club hosted by the British New Zealand Trade Council.
At 0930 on Tuesday 20th HRH will give a keynote address, entitled “New Zealand and the United Kingdom – Business partners and friends in the 21st century”, at the Opportunity UK: Trade and Investment Summit, in the Sky City Convention Centre, Auckland. He will then join the Governor-General for a function at Government House to celebrate International Down’s Syndrome Day. Later he will visit McDell Marine boatbuilders at Glendene, and in the evening attend the Opportunity UK: Trade and Investment Summit gala charity dinner at Sky City.
The Duke of York will leave New Zealand on Thursday 22nd March.
Professor Noel Cox
Chairman
Press Release
24th February 2007
The Queen’s Birthday should be sacrosanct
The suggestion promoted by the Hon Peter Dunne, MP, that The Queen’s Birthday could be renamed New Zealand Day, is surprising. If the intention is to create a new national holiday which is less divisive than Waitangi Day, then the choice of the day on which we currently mark the Sovereign’s Official Birthday is rather unusual. To abolish the Queen’s Birthday holiday – which is what this would achieve – would be a poor way of encouraging acceptance for a new “non-controversial” national holiday. It would also be a potential source of on-going controversy and resentment.
Waitangi Day is of national importance because it is the anniversary of the signing of the Treaty between Queen Victoria and the Maori chiefs of New Zealand, a Treaty which has been called the founding document of New Zealand. It may have been controversial in the past, but the event it commemorates is integral to making New Zealand what it is today, and cannot be ignored. The Sovereign’s Birthday is also of national importance, and reflects part of our heritage. It is the day we mark the anniversary of the birth of the Queen of New Zealand, descendant of Queen Victoria, and the Sovereign of all New Zealanders, Maori and non-Maori. A New Zealand Day celebrated on this day would be a perpetual reminder of a slight on our Queen.
Let us instead follow the example of other countries, such as Canada, and mark the Queen’s Birthday more actively.
Professor Noel Cox
Chairman
Press Release
22nd August 2006
The Maori King Movement
This week has seen the death of the sixth head of the Maori King Movement, Te Arikinui Dame Te Ata-i-rangi-kaahu, ONZ DBE. Dame Te Arikinui had held the title of Maori Queen for 40 years.
The office, which has no constitutional position or formal powers outside the Tainui tribal administration, was instituted by the Waikato tribes in late nineteenth century in conscious imitation of the British monarchy, which they rightly saw as a highly effective form of government. It has served as a symbol of the identity of Waikato Maori for successive generations, and its prominence has been particularly enhanced in recent years as a result of Government policy. An example of this is that visiting overseas dignitaries were customarily taken to see the Maori Queen. The Government has shown respect and honour towards the head of the Maori King Movement which is denied to the Sovereign.
Yet the relationship between the Maori King Movement and the Crown itself remains important. Like most Maori, Dame Te Ata-i-rangi-kaahu held the monarchy in high regard, and saw the relationship between herself and The Queen as very important. The life and death of the Maori Queen serves to remind us of the importance of monarchy, whether it be regional, national, or international, as an important unifying element in an otherwise troubled world.
Professor Noel Cox
Chairman
Press Release
27th May 2006
The Manahi VC petition
The Monarchist League of New Zealand Inc. Press Release 26th May 2006 It has been reported that Defence Minister Phil Goff has this week asked Buckingham Palace to reconsider the decision to not review the award of a VC to Lance-Sergeant Haane Manahi. This request is worthy of comment. Mr Goff can be commended for recognising that The Queen is the source of all royal honours and is entitled to be consulted on all matters concerning them. However, it may be questioned whether it was altogether appropriate for Mr Goff to approach the Palace on behalf of the advocates for the late Sergeant Manahi. Mr Goff could be in danger of being seen as a lobbyist for Sergeant Manahi's supporters. As Minister of Defence he has a wider duty, and specific responsibility for gallantry medals. This duty ought to include, one would have thought, taking the broader view of any question and not becoming involved too closely in individual cases. His duty is to uphold policy, not promote departures from it.
It is unfortunately that Mr Goff has been reported as asserting that Manahi's gallantry was "unrecognised". The sergeant, as did many others who were originally nominated for the Victoria Cross, received the Distinguished Conduct Medal. This is almost as highly regarded as the VC. Ultimately it is both unwise and unhelpful to attempt to second-guess decisions of more than sixty years ago. It is impossible to say with any certainty now whether or not Sergeant Manahi ought to have received the VC rather than the DCM. But he didn't, and the matter should be left to rest. Many thousands of acts of heroism went unrecognised. Many hundreds of soldiers received lesser awards than they were originally nominated for, or than they possibly deserved. These people did not campaign for higher awards - nor, significantly, did Sergeeant Manahi.
There is no reason why this one case should be treated as special, or why the long-standing principle of not reviewing such decisions should be abandoned. Nor is it appropriate to portray the Queen, as some media have done, as somehow denying Manahi something which was his by right. Gallantry medals are honours and come from the Crown. There would be precious little honour in them if they were awarded as the result of lobbying. It would also be very unfortunate if the first award of the Victoria Cross for New Zealand were to be made in such controversial circumstances - assuming that this would be an award of a New Zealand medal, rather than of the VC under British regulations, for which Manahi was originally nominated.
Dr Noel Cox
Chairman
Press Release
21st April 2006
The Queen's 80th birthday
It is with great pleasure that we today mark the 80th birthday of Her Majesty The Queen. Throughout New Zealand, the Commonwealth, and the wider world there is scarcely a single public figure who can compare with The Queen. She is universally admired and respected for her professionalism, dignity and example. The peoples of her realms, and of the Commonwealth, have been truly blessed to have such a person as their Queen and Head. God Save The Queen!
Dr Noel Cox
Chairman
Press Release
4th April 2006
New Governor-General announced
The Monarchist League of New Zealand Inc. welcomes the announcement that Her Majesty The Queen has appointed Anand Satyanand, DCNZM as the next Governor-General of New Zealand. Mr Satyanand will replace Her Excellency Dame Silvia Cartwright in August.
A former District Court Judge and later Ombudsman, Judge Satyanand is a well-known and respected figure from the legal community. Most recently he has been registrar of pecuniary interests of Members of Parliament.
Anand Satyanand is likely to be the first representative of the Crown since Thomas Gore Browne, Governor 1855-1861, to not have a title when in office. His DCNZM is equivalent to a knighthood but lacks the style "Sir" which had originally belonged to the highest grade of the New Zealand Order of Merit. Perhaps this omission can be rectified.
It may also be noted that the appointment of Anand Satyanand as Governor-General was widely reported some weeks ago; evidence of an leak which ought to be investigated. Speculation as to the identity of a new Governor-General is probably inevitable and ultimately unrewarding but harmless; premature disclosure of their name is not however appropriate.
Dr Noel Cox
Chairman, The Monarchist League of New Zealand Inc.
Press Release
18th March 2006
Queen's Counsel consigned to scrapheap
The Lawyers and Conveyancers Bill was passed by the House of Representatives in this past week, and will shortly become law, after the Governor-General assents to it in the name of The Queen. Senior lawyers who until now have been appointed Queen's Counsel, will now be called Senior Counsel. There is no significant change in the nature of the office except the name change. This appears to have been done as part of the move by certain members of the Government to remove references to the monarchy, without having a popular mandate to do so. The loss of the title Queen's Counsel - which may be used by current holders of the title at their discretion - is to be deeply regretted. We hope that Parliament will, in due course, realise that this form of political manipulation of the legal profession is wrong, and restore the title Queen's Counsel. It is also to be regretted that many of the Members of Parliament who have in the past indicated that they are patriotic and loyal New Zealanders have chosen to remain silent in the face of a serious assault upon our national heritage.
Dr Noel Cox
Press Release
5th March 2006
The Lawyers and Conveyancers Bill and Queen's Counsel
The Lawyers and Conveyancers Bill will have its Third Reading in the House of Representatives this week. Aside from implementing a number of wide-ranging changes to the legal profession, it will – if passed without amendment – rename the office of Queen’s Counsel. These will thereafter be known as “Senior Counsel”. No reason is given for renaming the office.
It might be argued that the title isn’t important, but if that were so, then why is it being changed? It would appear to be another attempt to remove a symbol – and an important and highly visible one – associated with the Crown.
“QC” is a well-known and internationally understood brand of excellence; “SC” would be much less respected, as the experience of several Australian states has shown. “Senior Counsel” is at best unimaginative, at worst unnecessarily ambiguous. Most importantly, this change is purely politically-motivated.
Clause 105 of the Bill is the key provision:
105 Office of Queen’s Counsel to be known as Senior Counsel
(1) As from the commencement of this section, the office previously known in New Zealand as Queen’s Counsel is to be known in New Zealand as Senior Counsel.
The Bill as originally drafted caused particular offense. The original clause 106(1) provided that:
As from the commencement of this section, –
(a) no person may be appointed as a Queen’s Counsel or King’s Counsel for New Zealand; and
(b) the prerogative right or power of the Crown to appoint persons as Queen’s Counsel or King’s Counsel for New Zealand ceases to have effect as part of the law of New Zealand.
This showed a determined effort to remove the Queen’s Counsel “root and branch”. They were not merely abolished, but banned as well, and the royal prerogative in this regard abrogated.
This constitutionally outrageous provision has gone. Instead the Bill provides that:
(5) The powers conferred by this section do not derogate from the power to appoint, under the Royal prerogative, persons to the office previously known as Queen’s Counsel and to designate the persons appointed to that office as Senior Counsel.
(1) The Governor-General may, by Order in Council, make regulations prescribing---
(a) the process by which candidates may be recommended to the Governor-General for appointment, by letters patent, under the Royal prerogative as Senior Counsel:
This is much milder and less offensive. In effect the office of Queen’s Counsel is now simply to be renamed, and would remain a Crown appointment under the royal prerogative. As before, current QCs would be allowed to keep their titles if they wished to do so.
The Bill changes the title, while making no significant change to the nature of the office – discussions as to whether counsel in partnerships should be eligible for appointment notwithstanding. The technical distinctions as to whether this is a new office, or merely renamed, and whether it is appointed under the royal prerogative or exclusively under the authority of the Bill, are important, but would scarcely attract public notice.
What remains vitally important is that if this Bill is passed as it stands no more Queen’s Counsel will be appointed, and we will instead have the unimaginatively named “Senior Counsel”.
This type of reform has no place in the legal profession, which should be – and seen to be – non-political. It should also be asked whether The Queen has been consulted, in this year of Her Majesty’s 80th birthday, about the ending of Queen’s Counsel. Many Queen’s Counsel have expressed concern at the proposed destruction of their office, but have felt powerless to prevent this from happening, and reluctant to even speak in its defence, for fear of entering a political debate.
The title of Queen’s Counsel should be retained as reflecting New Zealand’s constitutional structure, the history of the institution in New Zealand, and its established reputation in New Zealand and abroad. There is no reason for a change.
We urge Members of Parliament to oppose the passage of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Bill as presently drafted, and amend those provisions which are designed to advance the so-called “republic by stealth”. Such a move as the Bill proposes is scarcely stealthy; it is open and unequivocal in its determination to remove yet another part of our heritage as a constitutional monarchy.
Dr Noel Cox
Press Release
28th January 2006
The Queen's 80th Birthday
This year marks the 80th birthday of Her Majesty The Queen and the 85th birthday of HRH The Duke of Edinburgh
The Monarchist League will be holding a dinner to mark these milestones. The former Governor-General, Sir Paul Reeves will be guest of honour. There are also to be a series of events in the United Kingdom and elsewhere.
Buckingham Palace is planning a number of events to celebrate The Queen's 80th birthday, both around Her Majesty's actual birthday on 21st April and her official birthday on 17th June (4th June in New Zealand).
Events are being planned to take place at both Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle and will combine private family celebrations with more public occasions.
The Queen will spend her actual birthday, 21st April, at Windsor Castle as usual, and the official birthday will be marked by the Trooping the Colour on 17th June. On 19th April, The Queen and The Duke of Edinburgh will host a reception and lunch at Buckingham Palace for some of those people who will also be celebrating their 80th birthday on 21st April.
The Prince of Wales will host a family dinner for The Queen on the evening of 21st April.
On Sunday 23rd April Members of the Royal Family will attend a special Service of Thanksgiving at St George's Chapel, Windsor, to celebrate The Queen's 80th birthday.
On 15th June The Queen and The Duke of Edinburgh will attend a National Service of Thanksgiving at St Paul's Cathedral, London, followed by a Lunch given by the Lord Mayor and the Corporation of London.
On 25th June The Queen will host a "birthday" Garden Party at Buckingham Palace for children from all over the United Kingdom.
So far no events have been announced in New Zealand – other than the Monarchist League-sponsored dinner – but we hope that local councils, if not the Government, will see fit to mark the Queen's birthday in some appropriate manner.
The Monarchist League dinner will be held on Saturday 22nd April.
Dr Noel Cox
Dinner to mark the Queen's 80th Birthday
21st January 2006
A Public Dinner is to be held to mark the 80th Birthday of Her Majesty The Queen and the 85th Birthday of HRH The Duke of Edinburgh. It is to be held in the Main Dining Room, Old Government House, Princes Street, Auckland on Saturday 22nd April 2006, at 7.00 for 7.30 pm. The Guest Speaker will be the Rt Rev’d Sir Paul Reeves, GCMG GCVO QSO. Dress is to be as formal as you wish (Black or White Tie/evening dress suggested). The price of a single ticket is $65. Please complete and return the slip below to arrive by Friday 10th March. Please return to: The Chairman, Monarchist League of New Zealand Inc., 123 Stanley Road, Glenfield, Auckland 1310.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Queen’s Birthday Dinner 22nd April 2006
Enclosed is a cheque (made out to “The Queen’s Birthday Dinner”) for $ for tickets at $65 each
Name(s):
Address:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Press Release
11th May 2005
Oaths Review
Following a review of oaths conducted over the past year the Minister of Justice, the Hon Phil Goff, yesterday introduced a Bill into Parliament to alter a range of official oaths, and the oath of allegiance.
Oaths altered by this Bill cover Allegiance, Citizenship, Members of Parliament, the Judiciary, Executive Councillors, Parliamentary Under-Secretaries, members of the Armed Forces, Police, special constables, and the local government officials' declaration. The Bill provides a Maori version of each oath as an option.
In conformity with the stated aim of modernising the wording of oaths the proposed changes include the removal of what is described as archaic language, and words or phrases that were redundant or lacked clear meaning; simplifying meanings; and ensuring a consistency of language wherever appropriate. Standard phrases have also been incorporated where possible.
Public consultation during the review drew only a limited response, but there was clear support for retaining the current values and beliefs, particularly loyalty to the Queen, and this was reflected in the proposed changes. There are no radical changes, with the oaths continuing to be made to the Queen. The only significant change to oaths and affirmations is that new citizens and members of Parliament will in future pledge loyalty to New Zealand, as well as the Queen, and will commit themselves to upholding New Zealand's values of democracy, and the rights and freedoms of its people.
While it may be questioned what "loyalty to New Zealand", and "respect for its democratic values" actually mean, it is heartening that no attempt was made to remove the oath of allegiance to the Queen.
Dr Noel Cox
Chairman, The Monarchist League of New Zealand Inc.
The text of the sermon of the Rt Rev'd Peter Atkins, at a Service to mark the 50th anniversary of the coronation, may be read here
John Collinge: Long may the Queen reign over us
The New Zealand High Commission in London has many functions - with Government, the Foreign Office, the City of London, the Commonwealth and so on - but, happily, there is also the relationship with the head of state.
When I had occasion once to propose a toast to Her Majesty, I toasted her as the "Queen of New Zealand" rather than as the more usual "Queen of United Kingdom and other Realms". Immediately, I saw the Duke raise his eyebrows and I thought that I may have unwittingly put my foot in it.
But we were after all in the New Zealand Residence in London (ie on New Zealand soil) at a New Zealand occasion. The Queen is separately the Queen of New Zealand by virtue of the will of the New Zealand Government and its people - not just because she is also the Queen of Great Britain.
The Queen obtains her status from the will of the New Zealand people.
She has always said in her famous phrase that "if the monarchy is not wanted we will go quietly", and the Duke said early on that "the monarchy does not exist for the monarch - it exists for the people".
The sentiment that it is for the people of New Zealand alone was also pointedly and quite deliberately expressed to me by the British Government through the Secretary of State.
Make no mistake, I do not believe that the British Government or the monarchy would ever seek to influence that decision by the New Zealand people.
Further, it is the absolute right of any Prime Minister of New Zealand to express a personal view in favour of New Zealand becoming a republic.
However, it is a convention that in such circumstances the monarch is advised first. That did not happen in the case of one Prime Minister and, although the Queen did not say so, I became aware of disappointment through her aides.
How are such matters communicated by the palace? Not by diplomatic note in the case of the Foreign Office, but by gentle aside in a low-key way. But the meaning is clear.
If there were to be a New Zealand republic, the Queen would, I believe, be disappointed to lose the role as head of state. That is because it is plain that she takes it so seriously and clearly has great affection for this country.
As to communications with the head of state, in view of the nature of the Queen's position, this is not done on a hotline phone-call basis. Rather, with due deference, one usually awaits for the palace to take the initiative.
There was no shortage of that initiative and the palace went out of its way to ensure that the New Zealand High Commissioner participated in anything at all appropriate - not to him personally but as a representative of New Zealand.
That starts, on arrival, by way of an informal chat with the Queen. Ambassadors are received with carriages, motorcades, pomp and ceremony but High Commissioners (ie those from the Commonwealth) get nothing but a personal chat. Although it may seem strange, it is a compliment - a chat among friends rather than a formal reception.
It is a recognition of the fact that a High Commissioner arrives from a country of which the Queen is head of state to a country of which she is also head of state. In a way, a High Commissioner is her emissary to herself. This informal chat in an extended family context is meant as a compliment. For the British, life is not meant to be straightforward but abounds with nuances.
The first thing you notice about the Queen is her personal dignity and professionalism in the job - the purpose and the constancy she brings to the role. That is, of course, so well known and acknowledged by all that I am not telling you anything new in that.
But after the first impression, you begin quickly to realise how well informed she is about New Zealand. Not only the black-letter knowledge or hard news but also the soft news, ie the awareness of what is going on here and the personalities involved in it.
I had come from being president of the National Party and at the time was an insider on most things that were happening. I remember thinking, on meeting the Queen for the first time, that the Prime Minister would be mortified if he knew what she knew about the inner workings and personalities of Government in New Zealand.
Where does she get that knowledge? I can assure you that she is not briefed through the New Zealand High Commission to that level. She may get input from the British diplomatic service or the Governor-General but it could not be as detailed as that. The fact is that, in my view, the palace takes its own steps to be independently informed and advised from New Zealand itself. The process is no doubt helped by the fact that at the time three of her staff at the palace were New Zealanders.
When I had my initial audience with the Queen it was the time of the fall of communism in Russia and the discussion turned at her suggestion to whether that would also affect China. Would it be the next to fall?
I had been on a state visit to the People's Republic and had read a little Chinese history. I ventured that over the millennia the Chinese had extraordinary success with the longevity of their dynasties - much longer than ours. Immediately, I said this I knew it could be interpreted as being in comparison with the Windsor dynasty. She politely moved on to the next subject - and saved me.
I spoke about the professionalism of the Queen in performing the formal duties. There is another side also. I experienced this when invited to Windsor Castle to dine with about 20 people, about half of whom were clearly close friends of the Queen and Duke. In that environment, Her Majesty was very down to earth in a natural and homely way and one might have been forgiven from thinking that she was just like anyone else might be in their own home relaxing among friends. That was an eye-opener to me.
Yes, there were some 14 corgis running free around the reception room - around the feet of the guests. It was noticeable that there were more than two members of staff making sure that everything was toward and that if the dogs disgraced themselves it was readily amended. And they did. I remember thinking at the time - although not quite expecting this and thinking it a little unusual - that if the sovereign did not have special privileges of this kind there was little point in being one.
Another impression which you hear is that the monarchy is unreceptive to change. Frankly, I think that there are dangers in being too progressive in that context but my experience is that the monarchy is responsive to change. The Queen has herself noted that change is a constant and she has eased the monarchy out of aloofness but not so far as familiarity breeds contempt.
We have constitutional monarchy and this is sometimes equated with the absence of power and a minor role. But the role of monarch can have special significance.
For example, an IRA bomb planted in the Grand Hotel in Brighton at a Conservative Conference, aimed at killing Margaret Thatcher, killed five others. The Queen, who was in Wyoming at the time, declined for many hours to take a call from Ronald Reagan until she had spoken to the Prime Minister first. It was a matter of recognising the security of her Government and emphasising the will to go forward. Symbolic gestures can result in powerful and important messages.
Back in New Zealand, I am aghast at the republican agenda based solely on some philosophical position, upon some remembrance that distant forebears were in 1798 engaged in the Wexford Uprising, upon some false idea that it is to New Zealand's advantage to stand alone in the world, and so on. That agenda is having significant success - the honours system, the Privy Council, and so on. The agenda appears to be that, one day, ultimately the monarchy in New Zealand will look anachronistic.
I am a monarchist myself not because of philosophy, or history, or tradition, or the home of my forebears, or an emotional attachments, or even respect for the magnificent service of the Queen. The issue is for me institutional and not personality driven. I am a monarchist because I believe that we part from an established order only when a substantial case is made that departure is in New Zealand's self interest.
We are not so different from Britain that we need to express it by having a separate head of state. In fact, in the world we are a natural complement to Britain - the big guy and the little guy working in tandem to the mutual benefit of both. Like it or not, we are and are still seen as closely linked to Britain in the world. When you think about it, there are few countries so close. The monarchy helps provide international theatre and image for New Zealand. It is in our interests to look outwards and not inwards. There is not in my view at the present time any reason of moment to change or advantage to secure.
To date, of course, the opinion polls tell us that the monarchy is still favoured by a considerable majority here - by some 65-70 per cent. In fact, by a majority which narrowly exceeds that in Britain on one opinion poll at least. We may be even more loyal to the monarchy than the people of Britain.
That is so notwithstanding the seemingly massive agitation to the contrary. It is a classic case of the media not being able to impose its own views on the people by the power of the press.
Queen Elizabeth's contribution has been that she has sustained the monarchy for 50 years to date in years of great change and aggressive attacks. She has also gradually redefined it to a lower key and to be a more integral part of our society. Long may it last.
* John Collinge, a former NZ High Commissioner to London, gave this speech to the Monarchist League on the 50th anniversary of the Queen's coronation.