As 21 gunshots rang out in Wellington Harbor on Sunday, a few hundred gathered on the lawns of New Zealand’s parliament for the official announcement of their new king. The crowd was sparse, in relative terms: the size you’d expect outside parliament for a high-profile petition, and about a tenth of the number gathered to mourn a vigil for George Floyd. A few lonely bunches of flowers rested at the gates of the British High Commission. Although headlines and primetime were dominated by news of the death of the head of state, the death of Queen Elizabeth II and the transfer of power to King Charles III did not cause outbursts of grief or emotion. Perhaps the most telling display came from a talk show host, who paused for a single, audible sob before continuing on with the morning show. A small number of floral tribute bouquets for the Queen’s death lie at the gates of the British High Commission in Wellington, New Zealand. Photo: Lynn Grieveson/Getty Images The tributes to Queen Elizabeth – who was widely popular and respected – may have been tempered by a more ambivalent response to the new king, as well as growing public awareness of the crown’s violent colonial history. But these reservations do not herald an appetite for constitutional change. In her brief remarks to parliament on Sunday, a somber Jacinda Ardern said she believed the relationship with the monarchy would “deepen” under King Charles – putting the country on a different trajectory to a number of other Commonwealth leaders, its which the monarchy has informed of their intention to move towards independence. On Monday, Ardern confirmed she would not take any imminent steps to move New Zealand towards a democracy. “I think that’s where New Zealand will go over time,” he said. “But I don’t see it as a short-term measure or something that’s on the agenda anytime soon.” The Queen and Prince Philip touring New Zealand in 1953. Photo: Hulton Archive/Getty Images
Struggling with a complicated colonial legacy
This week’s muted viewing was in stark contrast to Queen Elizabeth II’s visit in 1953, when New Zealanders packed the streets, waving British flags and offering flowers. History professor Katie Pickles, of the University of Canterbury, says around three in four New Zealanders attended. “It was this huge, amazing turnout,” Pickles says, “this high point of New Zealand royalty.” Today, the legacy of the crown in New Zealand is seen in a more complex light as the country continues to grapple with the violence of its colonial history. Before the same royal visit, Maori houses and mares [meeting houses] leveled to “clear” the Queen’s parade route. In newspaper clippings, Ngāti Whātua boys watch their homes burn. The demolitions are part of a wider, painful series of land seizures and abuses for which New Zealand continues to assess and negotiate reparations. Commonwealth map “The monarchy has, in Māori terms, a whakapapa [genealogy] which includes all processes of colonization, warfare and land grabbing and resource extraction,” says Carwyn Jones, Pūkenga Matua [lead academic] of Māori law and philosophy at Te Wānanga o Raukawa. “There is a real question as to whether the crown in its current form can do that [rectify those wrongs] substantially, or if indeed it is closely connected with the breach of these warranties and requires some dissolution in order to be able to properly fulfill the promises made.’ As a country, Aotearoa New Zealand grew up alongside the Queen, Pickles says. Her reign was watched alongside the country’s evolution from “a developing nation-state that was very much on the apron of Britain … to a post-colonial, bi-cultural nation-state,” says Pickles. Now, at the end of her reign, she is on very different ground. The question of King Charles’s personal popularity in New Zealand is difficult to disentangle. The King has made nine, mostly uncontested visits over the years. Some were marked by protests – in 2005, he was greeted by topless protesters chanting “shame on colonization” and in 1995 he was attacked by a man with a can of air freshener. There were occasional moments of humor: a photo of Charles smiling next to a New Zealander wearing an “I’m with stupid” T-shirt sold for $22,000 at auction in 2021. But it’s unclear whether these visits developed the relationship his mother had. “Because the Queen was so popular, she brought the relationship,” says Pickles. But the widespread respect and affection for Queen Elizabeth will not automatically transfer to her successor along with the crown. “These are very different times and they are [King Charles and his wife] they are different people.” The then Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall on a visit to the Treaty of Waitangi sites in 2019. Photo: Victoria Jones/PA
“If it works, leave it alone”
Despite the monarchy’s mixed heritage, New Zealand shows no sign of rejecting it in pursuit of an independent constitution. “I guess it’s for the oldest reason of all: if it works, leave it alone,” says Jim Bolger, a former prime minister of New Zealand. Bolger, who informed Queen Elizabeth on a yacht trip in the mid-1990s that he was convinced New Zealand would soon become a republic, now says Aotearoa is one of the most complacent of devolved nations and of the Commonwealth on the prospect of independence. A Newshub Reid Research poll in February 2022 asked: “When Queen Elizabeth is no longer Queen, should New Zealand secede from the Commonwealth and become a republic?” 48% said no, they would prefer to remain and 36.4% yes. In practice, the head of state in New Zealand has little impact on the day-to-day running of the country, and there is correspondingly little appetite for constitutional overturning. But Bolger believes a change of head of state to King Charles could be enough to restart the debate about New Zealand’s democracy. “It’s not a criticism of Charles,” says Bolger. “But you can’t have the seismic change that we have – after 70 years of Queen Elizabeth, to a new leader – without all these issues coming to the fore. “People will ask whether it is consistent with democratic thought and principle that the birth of a child into a rich, aristocratic family in England should end up as head of state in New Zealand.”
