There's an appetite in some quarters to change our flag. There are those who question the relevance of the Union Jack and there are others who say our flag is too similar to that of Australia. And, yes, these are certainly two weaknesses with the design of our existing flag.
Shelley Bridgeman: Should we change our flag?

Subscribe to listen
The New Zealand national flag.Photo / Thinkstock

But if momentum does gather for a change of flag then its replacement design must be relevant and well considered - which obviously counts out the suggestion of the silver fern that is all too often mooted.

Firstly, because the silver fern is inextricably linked with local sporting teams, its inclusion on our flag would connect our image too firmly with sport when we as nation offer - and, in fact are - far more than that. Anyone who disapproves of the presence of the Union Jack would surely similarly shun the silver fern because it, too, is every bit as limiting in its outlook and narrow in its focus.
Secondly, at heart a silver fern is no more than a pretty symbol. As a readily recognised example of New Zealand popular iconography, it has no more right to appear on our national flag than a Buzzy Bee, Jandal, L & P bottle, Four Square man or kiwi. It represents a childish, one-dimensional view of what a flag should be. A flag is not the place for whimsical and kitsch Kiwiana - or representations that look more like a corporate logo than something which is supposed to engender national pride.
And surely no one could seriously be suggesting that a black background is a fitting colour for our flag. Depending on your outlook, the colour black symbolises death, depression, evil and mourning. It's also the background colour of Tui billboards which, as we all know, specialise in poking the borax. Presumably any promoters of a Black Flag (isn't that a brand of fly-spray?) are being similarly ridiculous.
I'm not even sure why so many people get agitated about the flag when the elephant in the room as far as our national image is concerned is surely the kiwi. Whoever chose this unprepossessing brown flightless bird to represent us as a people did us no favours. It's embarrassing when you compare it to the creatures other nations have adopted as their own: eagle (US), elephant (Thailand), jaguar (Brazil) and lion (England). Even the wallaby (Australia) and the rooster (France) are livelier and more vigorous than K-one-W-one.
Nothing goes right for the poor old kiwi. It's plain, it can't fly and is said to be endangered - unless, of course, that's just a convenient story.
The thing is: I'm not even sure they exist. I've lost count of the times I've dutifully tiptoed into a darkened kiwi house with eyes straining for a sighting. But I've not yet seen one. Am I the only New Zealander to wonder if the kiwi isn't some insider joke, some deliciously audacious hoax?
Debate on this article is now closed.