Talk:2015–2016 New Zealand flag referendums

Notes before passing

A couple of notes for if this article is passed. Firstly the title should be "New Zealand flag referendums, 2015–16", and secondly, the word "referenda" should be replaced by "referendums" as (a) it's what we use on Wikipedia and (b) it matches the title. Cheers, Number 57 20:56, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Merchant marine

With regard to the statement: "It is unclear how this is reconciled with the Regulatory Impact Statement's claim that the Red Ensign (used by the merchant marine) would not be changed," lay readers might think a few cargo commercial boats, and perhaps a few ferries might be impacted by this measure.

However, most people may not realise that the international treaty term "merchant marine" actually means every single boat registered, in this case, in New Zealand. I.e., only educated readers will be able to figure out that each and all personal and commercial sailboats, powerboats, fishing boats, etc., that currently fly a flag are at risk, depending on the cited "unclarity", of having to replace their flags in relatively short order. — Preceding unsigned comment added by XavierItzm (talk • contribs) 11:42, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

I should add I might suggest clarifying the nature of the term "merchant marine," or of replacing it with the words "all New Zealand boats that fly the national ensign." XavierItzm (talk) 11:45, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Article for shortlisted flag

I suppose we better had a separate article for the winner of round 1 of the referendum; notability criteria were certainly met before the votes came in. What's a suitable article name? Schwede66 22:12, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Kyle Lockwood's flag is currently a redirect; it would be a reasonable place to start such an article.-gadfium 02:54, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Good idea; thanks Gadfium. I see in that page's history that it was an article until it was turned into a redirect in June 2008. I've started with that version, tidied it up a bit, and added to it. Needs more work! Schwede66 06:53, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

List of Supporters

Can we please have either a piece on this page, or a link to another page on a list of supporters for either side of the referendum?

e.g.

Supporters of Lockwood's Flag

• Change the Flag NZ
• Kyle Lockwood - the flag's designer
• John Key - current prime minister
• Christopher Luxon - current chief executive of Air New Zealand

Supporters of the Current Flag

• Royal New Zealand Returned and Services' Association
• Winston Peters - Leader of New Zealand First

Neutral

159753 (talk) 19:25, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Such lists would be difficult to establish notability criteria for, and while the RSA made a statement in support of the current flag, this attracted some criticism from some members as being too political, and I don't know whether this is still their position.-gadfium 21:21, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

References

Recent edits re Change the NZ Flag

I've partially restored an edit (oddly directed at myself) which was correct in fact - i.e. John Key didn't solely campaign for flag change, there was also a group running a campaign (Change the NZ Flag) --LJ Holden 09:50, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

"Ships flying the New Zealand Red Ensign and ships belonging to the New Zealand Defence Force are not affected by any flag changes"

Wonderful! So, New Zealand may get a new flag, but its ships, boats, and sailing vessels will keep on using the 1902 flag! Forever! The title of this section is copied verbatim from the main article as the text stands on 12 March 2016. XavierItzm (talk) 15:42, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Olympics

I think this sentence is not exactly true: ”The current flag would have remained the official flag until then; for example, the current flag would have been flown during the 2016 Summer Olympics, four months after the second referendum took place, regardless of the results of the second referendum.” As far as I understand the Act and it's section 2 [1] if only Governor-General would had set a date to commence whole procedure just one month after the results, there would be no reason not to fly new flag during Olympics. Am I right? [2] Arvedui89 (talk) 20:41, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Illogical objection

<quote> During the first Parliamentary hearing, Labour Party, NZ First, Green Party and Māori Party expressed dissatisfaction with the order of the questions and said that the public should first be asked whether they want a change, and continue with a second referendum only if they do, or both questions compacted into one referendum </quote>

IMHO this objection makes zero sense and is **completely** illogical. Does it have to be included? Is it relevant, even if it's silly? --Lohoris (talk) 18:23, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

As you say, it's your opinion. Others may disagree. But what's important is whether there are reliable sources for this to have occurred, and if the answer to that question is yes, then it can (and should) be included. Schwede66 18:51, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

It is perfectly logical - and commonplace - to ask if voters want to reject something, and then more specifically, the nature of that change. In a recall election, voters are often asked to decide whether to keep the current office-holder, and *then* to vote on which replacement. In Brexit, voters were asked to vote yes or no, and *then* the politicians are now deciding what kind of exit to implement. There are countless other examples. Huangdi (talk) 03:45, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

“Referendums' Failure”

In several places the article describes the decision to keep the current flag as the “referendums' failure”. The stated purpose of the referendums was to ask the public to choose a flag, not to change the flag, and they were successful in doing this. The result was a failure for those who’d campaigned for change, not for the referendums.2A02:C7F:5E33:F00:5186:69A4:D4:6221 (talk) 11:23, 9 August 2021 (UTC)