Dame Susan's contention is that "if we understand and appreciate our differences, we can growth together into an Aotearoa New Zealand that is based on dignity and respect".
This is breathtakingly naive.
Like the preposterous defence of free speech offered up by John Key - when he metaphorically linked hands with the 40 or so political leaders who joined the Paris unity march - the reality betrays the loftiness of their sentiments.
Dame Anne Salmond has already chronicled the Key Government's many breaches on the free-speech front, ranging from the treatment handed out to Dirty Politics author Nicky Hager and journalist Andrea Vance over a leak of a report about the GCSB spy agency through to the intimidation of some public servants from proffering truly free and fearless advice.
Herald cartoonist Rod Emmerson this week aptly ridiculed the Prime Minister's statement with a cartoon magazine mockup, based on the Charlie Hebdo cover, of Key embracing photographer Ambrose Bradley with the caption "Un peu d'hypocrisie" (a little hypocrisy). It was Key's complaint following the "teapot tapes" incident at the 2011 election that resulted in police raiding newsrooms to recover recordings of what was a ridiculously anodyne discussion between the National Party leader and then Act leader John Banks.
Key's hypocrisy is not alone on this score, as the Guardian newspaper underscored with its record of just where other prominent leaders who linked arms on the Paris march really stand on free speech.
This is par for the course for politicians.
But what we don't debate is responsibility of our governments to ensure immigrants have respect for the values and freedoms of the nation that has welcomed them.
New Zealand has embraced multiculturalism and diversity with little thought given to what may also be lost through rapid changes that have resulted from huge changes in our racial, cultural and religious mix.
Auckland, for example, is now truly multicultural, with an ethic mix still dominated by Europeans (55 per cent), Asians (20 per cent), Maori (15 per cent) and Pacific (15 per cent). Elsewhere, New Zealand remains predominantly bicultural: European and Maori.
We celebrate differences with the many multicultural and ethnic celebrations.
But we have failed to inculcate respect for the predominant Western values of free speech and liberty that underpin this nation. We've not always been great at defending these values ourselves. For instance, Dame Tariana Turia should have been able to talk about the effects of colonisation on Maori (a "holocaust") without having her ministerial warrant threatened.
As a nation, we have had more confronting conversations about the relationships between European Pakeha and Maori. But we shy away from talking about the potential risk to our way of life posed by growing numbers of jihadists either homegrown or imported.
Hence, when the National Government wants to have a serious debate over surveillance measures, we lack the necessary framework to consider whether its actions are prudent or excessive.
Social cohesion is important to a nation.
Several European nations - not just France, from where Jews are now fleeing to Israel, but also Sweden - are having to confront a major challenge to their societal norms from rapidly growing Muslim populations.
New Zealand could be doing more on this front.
For instance, the recent Constitutional Advisory Panel recommended the Government introduce a national strategy for civics and citizenship education in schools and in the community, including the unique role of the Treaty of Waitangi, te Tiriti o Waitangi, and assign responsibility for its implementation. The Government appears more focused on changing the flag.
So on March 21, when we ponder "I am Aotearoa", let's recognise that sloganeering is not enough to protect our Western freedoms and values.
