Of course, the republican leveller Lewis Holden believes titles are just pompous holdovers, and insinuates that Her Majesty is being disrespectful in making this honour on the grounds that Prime Minister John Key reportedly said he was not interested. No kidding he's officially not interested, since obviously that would be akin to bestowing the honour upon himself. Mr. Holden is bright enough to see the political side of this, which means he's just being downright disingenuous with the ridiculous charge he levels at the Palace.At The Queen’s request, new rules for the granting and use of the title “The Right Honourable” will apply in New Zealand to preserve an important mark of distinction for the holders of the Nation’s highest public offices.
Henceforth, those appointed to the offices of the Governor-General, Prime Minister, Speaker and Chief Justice will be granted the title “The Right Honourable” ex officio, for life. This will bring a measure of association and continuity with the recent past; formerly, the most senior members of the Judiciary and the Executive in New Zealand gained this right upon appointment to the Privy Council, a practice which no longer exists.
In any event, this splendid decision by New Zealand (coming on the heels of its restoration of royal honours) is consistent with the practice in other Realms with the notable exception of Australia, whose prime ministers, chief justices and governors general seem content with the lower title, "The Honourable". Australia should immediately seek to reinstitute the grander honour for its highest office holders, if for no other reason than to bring it in line with the other Commonwealth Realms, like Canada and the United Kingdom.
Ah monarchists, always trying to have your cake and eat it too. Even if I'm wrong, you're bright enough to know that if the Prime Minister did want the title (see the Radio NZ interview where Key says it doesn't matter either way), that only goes to show the monarchy grants politicians prerogative powers while disguising their use in the petty coat of the monarchy. It also speaks to a the pomposity I noted, which even readers of the conservative National Business Review are apparently against.
ReplyDeleteAh republican, always trying to have their bread and eat it too. I'm sure even Mr Holden can see the irony in republican leaning politicans proclaiming their desire to be rid of royalist trappings, such as titles and honours but only if it doesn't apply to them!
ReplyDeleteFrom as the Rt Hon. Jim Boldger and the Rt Hon Helen Clarke to the Hon. Annette King it speaks of the small mindedness and the petty jealousies of those who detest those who earn their recognition.
As an aside, Royal honours were never dis-establshed in NZ, although this is a common mis-conception of the wilfully ignorant. All NZ honours have been issued under a NZ Royal warrant since the advent of the distinctly NZ honours system. It was only the titles that hypocritical republican-leaning politicans temporarily did way with.
Mac
"We can only guess at what the palace's motivation is. It looks like it's a bizarre attempt to make the monarchy relevant to New Zealanders."
ReplyDeleteOK, so you charge that the monarchy is irrelevant to New Zealand. Fair enough.
And now that it is apparently attempting to rectify this, you condemn it.
And you accuse us of wanting our cake and eating it too?
Make the charge of irrelevence as much as you wish Mr Holden. If it's true, then no number of titles will change that. But don't condemn that which you deem irrelevent when it does try to be relevant. That's just plain rude (not to mention exceedingly patronising, because they've actually decided to listen to you, you know?).
As for pomposity, a title isn't necessarily pompous. Frankly, I think rappers are pompous morons, but they don't have titles (unless you count their rapper names). All they have is bling.
Style, on the other hand, is eternal.
Not only that, but this reward is actually quite meritocratic. Knighthoods and the title of Right Honourable all immediately declare that someone has achieved much in their chosen field. Think of it as like winning a Nobel Prize, only the reward is a little bit more... lasting.
Oh, and none of this egalitarian rubbish. I'm Australian here, and I recognise that egalitarianism is actually a bunk concept (take it to its logical conclusion, and see why those who value success in life are generally opposed to it).
If Lewis Holden really believed the monarchy was irrelvant, he wouldn't be fighting so hard to get rid of it. The monarchy matters, gents - republic action speaks volumes.
ReplyDeleteHee! Hee! Hee! Lewis Holden is only upset because, as I told him back in 2007, it would only take a little visit to New Zealand by Prince William to completely reverse any republican gains. Hee! Hee! Hee!
ReplyDeleteHmm. I can't help but think the title is meaningless if it is not accompanied with a return to making appointments to the Privy Council. If Ministers of the Crown do not wish to recommend appointments to Her Majesty's Most Honourable Privy Council, then they ought not to recommend that anyone be entitled to the style of Privy Councillor. In this respect, whilst the restitution of the "Right Honourable" style is nice as a mark of royal favour, it is dangerous in that it divorces the responsibility of being a Privy Councillor from the right of the style of one.
ReplyDeletePrivy Councillors aren't the only people who use the style of "Rt Hon" - capital city lord mayors in Australia do for example (while in office). Most junior peers use it as part of their formal style too, like royals use HRH.
ReplyDeleteACMW, our Aussie cousin is indeed correct. Off the top of my head other users of the title,aside from Privy Councillors, include:
ReplyDelete1. UK - Barons and the Lord Mayor of london.
2. Australia - The Lord Mayors of Sydney, Melbourne, Adaleide, Peth and Hobart.
3. Canada - the Chief Justice.
As such, the use in NZ is entirely consistent with the other realms (less Australia) where it is reserved for the highest offices of state.
Personally, I'm curious to see if the newly consolodated city of Auckland gets a "Lord Mayor".
Canada has its own privy council - the Queen's Privy Council for Canada, but not all members of the privy council are entitled to The Right Honourable - only the prime minister, chief justice and governor general.
ReplyDelete"If Lewis Holden really believed the monarchy was irrelvant, he wouldn't be fighting so hard to get rid of it."
ReplyDeleteDead wrong. The monarchy is a useless appendix on our constitution, it serves no purpose other than distracting and obfuscating. I fight against it because it represents unreality in our constitution. I am a constitutional realist. Perhaps if the monarchy was relevant and served a constitutional purpose, I could defend it. But it doesn't and those of you who believe it does are simply distracted in the way that . And we can do much better than that.
By the way Teddy, we've seen the popularity of the monarchy climb before, in 2005 when William visited. The numbers didn't hold up for long.
Opps, that was meant to say "in the way that Bagehot himself described it".
ReplyDelete