A Republic?

The NZ Herald suggested yesterday we all get on with a republic if it is inevitable. I have a bit of an aversion to the "I" word (inevitable) because it has been too often used to justify something for which there is no obvious supporting rationale, but the person using the "I" word wants the thing to go ahead anyway.

I wrote them a letter about it.

Dear Herald Editor

I'm neither a monarchist nor a republican. That said, the present arrangements are cheap and harmless. I have not heard any argument for a republic that isn't emotive rather than practical. Why would a diverse country like New Zealand need a "single, unambiguous identity" anyway? Sounds like someone is insecure about something. Not me.

If we did have a President, what would that person do all day? Who would it be? How would they be chosen? I have no interest in a change that may dish up a President Peter Shirtcliffe, Mike Moore or Winston Peters who actually had any power. I see no compelling reason to change anything. Inevitable? G'won.

Yours in....why bother again....?

***

Like I say, I'm neither for nor against a republic. But before we go through the drama of making the change I think at least ONE really good reason should be obvious to everyone. Right now, I'm not seeing it.